Marriage Equality

[KnightersRevenge]

There will be kids in the age bracket of three to eight who are gay, and already know, and might have a crush on someone of the same sex. There will be kids who have gay parents, gay siblings and gay friends. You don't need to be teaching them about penises and vaginas and the various ways in which they interact, to be able to teach love, of which marriage is considered to be the ultimate expression.


You seem to be holding to a misconception that homosexuality is something people just choose to participate in once they're taught about it.

It would be pretty confusing for a kid with two mums to go to school and be told his parents can't get married, because they're already going to hell because they love each other.

Yup. There is a pervasive bias inherent here that homosexuality is wrong. Thus simply "acknowledging" that it exists becomes "celebrating". Treating our fellow citizens "fairly" gets derided as making them "protected". Whether you realise it or not your friends, family, community has included same-sex couples for hundreds and probably thousands of years. I "knew" I was heterosexual from a very young age, far too young to want or need to understand reproduction. I just knew I liked girls, a lot. I don't find it very hard to believe that there were same-sex-attracted kids feeling the exact same feelings I was at that age. Anyone who thinks they should be made to feel like they are defective or their feelings should be repressed is a monster.

The hardliners make it sound like primary school kids are going to be watching gay porn.

And once again this still has nothing to do with giving people equal opportunity to marry who they want.

 

[Coburgtiger]

Yup. There is a pervasive bias inherent here that homosexuality is wrong. Thus simply "acknowledging" that it exists becomes "celebrating". Treating our fellow citizens "fairly" gets derided as making them "protected". Whether you realise it or not your friends, family, community has included same-sex couples for hundreds and probably thousands of years. I "knew" I was heterosexual from a very young age, far too young to want or need to understand reproduction. I just knew I liked girls, a lot. I don't find it very hard to believe that there were same-sex-attracted kids feeling the exact same feelings I was at that age. Anyone who thinks they should be made to feel like they are defective or their feelings should be repressed is a monster.

The hardliners make it sound like primary school kids are going to be watching gay porn.

And once again this still has nothing to do with giving people equal opportunity to marry who they want.

It is mind blowing that people would actually want to make children miserable and confused by trying to pretend homosexuality doesn't exist. And if any kid does want to find out about it, they're told that heterosexuality is the only normal relationship, the only one Australia recognises.

That sort of thinking ruins lives.

Kids should be shown, from the very beginning, that homosexuality is part of society, and it's just a normal part of life. That way, gay people don't grow up confused, upset, depressed, anxious, self hating and even self harming.

It's disgusting that people value their own individual arbitrary system of beliefs over the health and safety of our society, of young people, and of children.

 

[Djevv]

There will be kids in the age bracket of three to eight who are gay, and already know, and might have a crush on someone of the same sex.

This is just nonsense. The attitude you yessites betray is that you want to get into the minds of young children with your unfounded ideas and indoctrinate them. Another excellent reason to vote no.

 

[Coburgtiger]

This is just nonsense. The attitude you yessites betray is that you want to get into the minds of young children with your unfounded ideas and indoctrinate them. Another excellent reason to vote no.

You are wrong. And dangerously so.

 

[lukeanddad]

I should preface by saying I'm firmly 'yes'. However, on the subject of when a sexual orientation emerges, I have no idea. I would have thought that until (say) 12, all we have is a friendship orientation. The attraction stuff emerges a little later, doesn't it?

 

[Djevv]

You are wrong. And dangerously so.

I find your ideas dangerous. You sound like you approve of sexualising 3-8 yo. Sex could and should be left right out of the curriculum at that age and absolutely no harm would result. Worryingly you dont question your ideologically driven beliefs.

 

[Coburgtiger]

I find your ideas dangerous. You sound like you approve of sexualising 3-8 yo. Sex could and should be left right out of the curriculum at that age and absolutely no harm would result. Worryingly you dont question your ideologically driven beliefs.

So you think when kids grow up they should not be allowed to know that their parents are married or in love?

You think that no kid should be allowed to understand that his sibling has a boyfriend?

Do you honestly believe that all love and partnership should be hidden from children until the arbitrary age of what, 9?

The answer is no. You don't have any problem with kids knowing that their mum and dad love each other.

You have a problem with them knowing their mum and mum love each other.


This insidious homophobia is disgusting and dangerous and leads to all the mental health issues experienced by the LGBTQI community, and ultimately leads to pain, suffering, and death.

 

[MD Jazz]

This is just nonsense. The attitude you yessites betray is that you want to get into the minds of young children with your unfounded ideas and indoctrinate them. Another excellent reason to vote no.

Sounds familiar.

 

[jb03]

Sounds familiar.

I thought the same, Djevv seemed to be describing all religions.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

I should preface by saying I'm firmly 'yes'. However, on the subject of when a sexual orientation emerges, I have no idea. I would have thought that until (say) 12, all we have is a friendship orientation. The attraction stuff emerges a little later, doesn't it?

Speaking for myself, no. Tell me at what age did you first play 'kiss chasey'? I was introduced to it at a Catholic school at the age of 7. Most boys my age thought girls were 'icky'. Or at least said they did. I didn't. I was always hoping to get 'caught' especially by one particular girl. I was 7. But I clearly remember wanting to talk to, be friends with, be close to a girl in my prep class. Perhaps I'm wired differently? But I can't think of any reason why there aren't kids just like me who are same-sex-attracted. It is unconscionable that they should be made to feel defective because of someone else's utterly unfounded religious belief.

DJ seems to want to link the sexual orientation of minors with sex. This is just a moralising attempt to muddy the waters. Sexuality and sex are not the same thing. 7 year old Knighters wasn't thinking about sex. He didn't know what it was. But he did know that he felt very differently about girls than boys. Dragging the innocent but heartfelt emotions of children into the gutter is disgusting. It is abhorrent. And it has absolutely nothing to do with Marriage equality.

 

[MD Jazz]

Sexuality and sex are not the same thing.

Dragging the innocent but heartfelt emotions of children into the gutter is disgusting. It is abhorrent. And it has absolutely nothing to do with Marriage equality.

Agree with this.

 

[lukeanddad]

Speaking for myself, no. Tell me at what age did you first play 'kiss chasey'? I was introduced to it at a Catholic school at the age of 7. Most boys my age thought girls were 'icky'. Or at least said they did. I didn't. I was always hoping to get 'caught' especially by one particular girl. I was 7. But I clearly remember wanting to talk to, be friends with, be close to a girl in my prep class. Perhaps I'm wired differently? But I can't think of any reason why there aren't kids just like me who are same-sex-attracted. It is unconscionable that they should be made to feel defective because of someone else's utterly unfounded religious belief.

DJ seems to want to link the sexual orientation of minors with sex. This is just a moralising attempt to muddy the waters. Sexuality and sex are not the same thing. 7 year old Knighters wasn't thinking about sex. He didn't know what it was. But he did know that he felt very differently about girls than boys. Dragging the innocent but heartfelt emotions of children into the gutter is disgusting. It is abhorrent. And it has absolutely nothing to do with Marriage equality.

Whatever you were feeling as a 7 year old, It's unlikely that it had anything to do with sex. And I'd be surprised that whatever you felt then was a suggestion of your eventual orientation.

The first time I felt something in my 'loins' was in grade 6 - as a 12 year old.

However, you may be correct; there may have been 7 year old girls at your school who wanted to be caught by a girl...

 

[Djevv]

Sorry such young children do not need to be burdened with such an adult concept as 'am I Gay'! Absolutely abhorrent.

Nothing to do with marriage equality you say? Well the school was hauled over the coals because it was not teaching a 'fundamental british value'. So how does homosexuality become that - by enshrining it as the equivalent and with the status of marriage. This absolutely guarantees sex-education in future must be homosexual practice and gay relationships. To do anything else is to promote thr backwards concept of hetero-normativity.

I must say I am surprised and disappointed that people are unable to connect the dots. Or unwilling. Completely ridiculous in my view to suggest that there will not be any 'unintended' consequences!

 

[Djevv]

So you think when kids grow up they should not be allowed to know that their parents are married or in love?

You think that no kid should be allowed to understand that his sibling has a boyfriend?

Do you honestly believe that all love and partnership should be hidden from children until the arbitrary age of what, 9?

The answer is no. You don't have any problem with kids knowing that their mum and dad love each other.

You have a problem with them knowing their mum and mum love each other.


This insidious homophobia is disgusting and dangerous and leads to all the mental health issues experienced by the LGBTQI community, and ultimately leads to pain, suffering, and death.

I dont really have any issues with children understanding that there are different kinds of adult relationships all equally loving and valuable. More than this is inappropriate. This is not and never has been homophobia.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

Sorry such young children do not need to be burdened with such an adult concept as 'am I Gay'! Absolutely abhorrent.

Sorry Djevv but your tunnel vision on this is outstanding. Religious indoctrination is generally perpetrated on very young minds and is successful mostly by dint of constant reinforcement. Sexuality is mostly biological and whether you choose to acknowledge it there are probably same-sex-attracted kids who are aware of this from a young age. Anyway who is 'burdening' these kids? All anyone is talking about is lifting a burden placed on them by 'tradition' and religious bigots who think they are malformed.

Nothing to do with marriage equality you say? Well the school was hauled over the coals because it was not teaching a 'fundamental british value'. So how does homosexuality become that - by enshrining it as the equivalent and with the status of marriage. This absolutely guarantees sex-education in future must be homosexual practice and gay relationships. To do anything else is to promote thr backwards concept of hetero-normativity.

What do you think is happening in Sex Ed classes mate? Instructional videos on different positions? Good blow job technique? I don't remember ever having Sex Ed at my Catholic school but I suspect it is mostly about safe sex practices, issues of consent and STDs. etc. And all only in classes where the discussion is age appropriare. No 6yr old Sex Ed I don't think. That was left to the priest. (He wasn't big on consent either). None of which has anything to do with allowing your friends and neighbours to get married.

I couldn't give a monkey's about what this school was doing. Yes it is important for any school to give its students a well rounded education. That might mean that even though the local population doesn't include many French people they might still learn a little European history including the French Revolution. It also means that while homosexuality in the community may be statistically low it is still covered in relevant classes. Schools are attempting or aspiring, one would hope, to turn out well rounded thoughtful citizens at the end of their education.

I must say I am surprised and disappointed that people are unable to connect the dots. Or unwilling. Completely ridiculous in my view to suggest that there will not be any 'unintended' consequences!

Some of us are connecting the dots and getting a nice seaside landscape with a same-sex couple picking shells. Some are ending up with Bacchanalia. How do we bridge that divide?

 

[Brodders17]

Sorry such young children do not need to be burdened with such an adult concept as 'am I Gay'! Absolutely abhorrent.

Nothing to do with marriage equality you say? Well the school was hauled over the coals because it was not teaching a 'fundamental british value'. So how does homosexuality become that - by enshrining it as the equivalent and with the status of marriage. This absolutely guarantees sex-education in future must be homosexual practice and gay relationships. To do anything else is to promote thr backwards concept of hetero-normativity.

I must say I am surprised and disappointed that people are unable to connect the dots. Or unwilling. Completely ridiculous in my view to suggest that there will not be any 'unintended' consequences!

AGAIN, all reports suggest this school was in breach of the Equality Act, that came in years before same sex marriage in England. They were in breach before the marriage law was changed, and would have been in breach if it never changed.
The issue of sex education in schools is separate. But again this is what the 'no' camp want. To confuse the issue because they lack rational arguments.

 

[tigertim]

AGAIN, all reports suggest this school was in breach of the Equality Act, that came in years before same sex marriage in England. They were in breach before the marriage law was changed, and would have been in breach if it never changed.
The issue of sex education in schools is separate. But again this is what the 'no' camp want. To confuse the issue because they lack rational arguments.

Yes, its bizarre. The yes people say yes because jts simply fair and equitable.

The no say no because it,ll if SSM gets up it,ll fade the curtains.

 

[MD Jazz]

Sorry such young children do not need to be burdened with such an adult concept as 'am I Gay'! Absolutely abhorrent

Better wait until they are gay adults and try conversion therapy. Lyle loves a good conversion.

 

[Ian4]

I find your ideas dangerous. You sound like you approve of sexualising 3-8 yo. Sex could and should be left right out of the curriculum at that age and absolutely no harm would result. Worryingly you dont question your ideologically driven beliefs.

you think sex education is harmful for primary school aged children. I think religious education is harmful for primary school aged children. would you accept it if religious education and sex education were both banned until high school age?

 

[Rosy]

you think sex education is harmful for primary school aged children. I think religious education is harmful for primary school aged children. would you accept it if religious education and sex education were both banned until high school age?

Depends how it's done for mine. Basic information (very, very basic) on both topics is fine by me.