Goto Chockstone Home

  Guide
  Gallery
  Tech Tips
  Articles
  Reviews
  Dictionary
  Links
  Forum
  Search
  About

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

  Shop

Black Diamond "STOPPER" Set. (Sizes 4 to 13) - 10 pieces. Comes with a "free" karabiner for racking.   $109.00
16% Off

Chockstone Photography Australian Landscape Photography by Michael Boniwell
Australian Landscape Prints





Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

 Page 2 of 12. Messages 1 to 20 | 21 to 40 | 41 to 60 | 61 to 80 | 81 to 100 | 101 to 120 | 121 to 140 | 141 to 160 | 161 to 180 | 181 to 200 | 201 to 220 | 221 to 235
Author
OT: Rebelious reopening of locked topic
simey
24/08/2010
4:56:35 PM
I have never given much thought to this debate before (probably because I don't value the institution of marriage much). But seeing the issues presented so clearly here, I'm quite shocked that Australian society doesn't allow gay marriages. It seems bizarre that we allow such discrimination in this day and age.

Nooj
24/08/2010
5:36:39 PM
On 24/08/2010 actionmax wrote:
>Whether or not you like
>or dislike the history, the definition of marriage is a commitment between
>man and woman. It is what it is and I don't personally believe it needs
>to be changed. It's like saying you don't like the definition of 'birthday',
>'anniversary', 'funeral' or some other long-standing celebration or tradition.
>It shouldn't be subject to change purely because it doesn't suit a certain
>group in society.
>

Not too long ago, the definition of marriage was limited to people marrying within their own racial groups. This definition didn't 'suit' a certain group in society: those who wanted to get married to people who had different skin colours. In fact it was discriminatory. And so laws against interracial marriage were abolished. Do you get where I'm going with this?
PDRM
24/08/2010
5:45:14 PM
On 24/08/2010 nmonteith wrote:
>The current Australian legal definition of marriage as being between a
>man and woman is actually a new thing. It was put in place by the Howard
>government in the last 10 years. Previously it did not state what sex the
>two people had to be.

I believe it was brought in to Stop The Boats

P

oweng
24/08/2010
5:54:59 PM
The only arguement that I have heard that makes any vague sense to me is the 'slippery slope' argument.

For example, I dont care in the slightest what consenting adults do, as long as nobody gets hurt. So gay marriage to me seems fine.

But if I apply the same criteria, I cant see any problem with plural marriages between multiple consenting adults (I know that there are issues with abuse of power and plural marriages but there are plenty of shitty 'normal' marriages too).

Then going to the extreame, whats the big issue with a brother and sister getting married? Or a mother and son? Obviously there may be concerns with the health of children, but im sure there are cases where brothers and sisters have fallen in love any wanted to get married.

Thats the only arguement I have heard against gay marriage that I could see the logic of. Even then I dont really buy it. 10% of the population (gay) is a big chunk. Seems unfair to discriminate given that I doubt more than 1% would be interested in plural marriage, and 0.01% interested in incestuous marriage.
rod
24/08/2010
6:12:23 PM
On 24/08/2010 nmonteith wrote:
>The current Australian legal definition of marriage as being between a
>man and woman is actually a new thing. It was put in place by the Howard
>government in the last 10 years. Previously it did not state what sex the
>two people had to be.

Correct, pretty good illustration of how political parties can go off on tangents.

Marriage is a pretty cool thing but its not for everyone, in the wrong circumstance it can just lead to a whole lot of financial hassle and heartache. I could offer a whole bunch of verbiose BS on the pros and cons but in the end everyone will have the opinionated axe to grind so to hell with it: I'm happily married and I reckon its a great institution.
rod
24/08/2010
6:15:40 PM
On 24/08/2010 simey wrote:
>I have never given much thought to this debate before (probably because
>I don't value the institution of marriage much). But seeing the issues
>presented so clearly here, I'm quite shocked that Australian society doesn't
>allow gay marriages. It seems bizarre that we allow such discrimination
>in this day and age.

Same here but the suns drying everything out so I've only got about another 2 hours to care about it before going climbing and in that time I'm going to have a nice cup of tea and read the guidebook.
prb
24/08/2010
7:43:24 PM
On 24/08/2010 oweng wrote:
>10% of the population (gay) is a big chunk.

This much-quoted figure seems to have come from the Kinsey Report of 1948 which stated 10% of the American males surveyed were "more or less exclusively homosexual for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55". But the sample size was only 300, 25% of the men interviewed were (or had been) prison inmates, and 5% were male prostitutes.

I recall a paper published several years ago in the Medical Journal of Australia which concluded that the prevalence of homosexuality (defined as identifying as homosexual and living accordingly) for both sexes was between 2 and 3%. And the study was done in Sydney!
Wendy
24/08/2010
8:04:15 PM
On 24/08/2010 oweng wrote:
>The only arguement that I have heard that makes any vague sense to me is
>the 'slippery slope' argument.
>
(snip)
>
>Then going to the extreame, whats the big issue with a brother and sister
>getting married? Or a mother and son? Obviously there may be concerns with
>the health of children, but im sure there are cases where brothers and
>sisters have fallen in love any wanted to get married.
>
Isn't this an argument against having marriage at all? I don't see why the argument starts with gay marriage.

Billie W
24/08/2010
8:31:41 PM
Well im proud to say that say that I will be "commiting" to my long life partner next year but I think the only thing Im worried about is we only have a month to climb Australia!
Wendy
24/08/2010
8:42:52 PM
I always find it mildly bizzare that as a non-marriage fan, I find myself defending the right of gay people to get married. It is all a bit related though. If as a society we did recognise other ways of celebrating your relationship as equally meaningful and valid, and marriage truly was just a partiular option specific to Christian heterosexuals rather than the norm, it wouldn't be such as issue. But instead it is denying a norm of relationships to a group of people that find it meaningful. As Peter pointed out, the reality is that prohibition of it matters immensely to those affected by it, and as mentioned earlier, it matters because:

1. As a society we don't value civil unions and the like in the same way as marriage. The film isn't "Muriel's Civil Union" is it?

2. It rubs in society's different view of gay and straight relationships and implies, well really when combined with point 1, outrightly states, that they are not equal. It continues to reflect discrimination in a whole range of areas that gay people experience.

3. Gay people can be religious too. Imagine if you were brought up with the belief that you had to be married to live with your partner or have sex and then discover that society won't let you get married because you love someone of the same sex.


On my apparent negative and oppressive view of marriage - well, i do think it's rather justified. Yes, I know people think about it as a symbol of love and commitment, I don't have a problem with symbols of love and commitment, but there are plenty of other ways to celebrate your relationship, to demonstrate love and committment that don't come with all that baggage, don't involve laws and religions I don't need and with divorce rates and rate of infidelity being as they are, marriage certainly isn't standing up to it's reputation as a way of ensuring love and committment any more so than any other.

On numbers, there aren't really any solid figures on homosexuality for a variety of reasons, such as what definition you use, who's asking, how they ask, what people's experience has been of telling people etc etc.

Sarah Gara
24/08/2010
9:48:27 PM
On 24/08/2010 Wendy wrote:
>
>3. Gay people can be religious too. Imagine if you were brought up with
>the belief that you had to be married to live with your partner or have
>sex and then discover that society won't let you get married because you
>love someone of the same sex.

I think that a religious gay person would be used to the church/society telling them they were wrong for being gay in the first place I wouldn't have thought that the revelation that they couldn't get married would really be all that much of a revelation - it would be frustrating though. I think I'd turn my back on the church if I were them I'd be amazed they hadn't already. I struggle with the whole concept of marriage which is really a religious thing - it's only relatively recently that it's gone secular... give it time and the slippery slope will slide..

Edit - I appreciate the church has considerably relaxed it's position on homosexuality -but our generation would certainly be used to it. x

rolsen1
24/08/2010
10:08:58 PM
Good on you Wendy, hang though, don't get married.

I believe marriage laws are discriminatory. I've always found it strange that churches will marry non-christian couples, people on the x marriage but not gays. As others have said, I would have thought that for the church to have any valid point it would only marry Christians.

On the thread closure, I think chockstone is a community (much like the church) and those who want to participate (much like getting married) need abide by the community expectations and the rules. If you don't want to follow the rules then don't join the club.

As a member of this community, I PM'd the mods suggesting a course of action regarding Phil's post, if you count yourself as part of a community then you speak up when difficult issues arise. They chose another route - which is cool. We can't change Phil's opinions but we can let him know what the community expectations are when he posts on chockstone, just like society can tell us how we need to behave if want to get married. Of course, these things can change and should be open to debate.

btw, not sure if this post makes sense!

Sarah Gara
24/08/2010
10:27:46 PM
Roslen -does make sense and good point. Slippery slopes abide though. I think that he said his bit everyone on here has acted as appropriate showing that chocky as a community doesn't stand for such comments. What are the mods options here? ban him? fine him? give him a big sticker saying gay hater? -wee bit silly I think what else will they start to ban -. there's a thumbs down button use it.

I said I wouldn't get sucked in to all this... x

Hendo
24/08/2010
10:49:49 PM
Iím not 100% convinced about the Ďitís none of your businessí argument. People care about what other people are doing in their community and that isnít necessarily wrong. As for the slippery slope I wonder which sexual deviations are outside of the arguments about itís not hurting you, itís none of your business, these people are often otherwise normal etc. It seems pretty often that when people are found to have unusual deviations (eg paedophilia) those that know them are surprised as they otherwise seem normal and well-adjusted. I expect there are people around here more creative with these things than myself who could come up with a better list than incest, bestiality, consensual underage relationships, polygamy, concubines.

The environment you are in can shape you to become almost anything. People here with very liberal views could easily be part of the Taliban had they been born in a few different desert countries. I donít put homosexuality outside this for a lot of people. Though I thankfully donít have first hand experience the reputations preceding prisons and the navy, they seem like extreme examples of people engaging in homosexual behaviour who most likely would otherwise not in Ďnormalí society. Of course this doesnít make it wrong, however if you think heterosexuality is preferable to homosexuality (not necessarily thinking homosexuality is bad) for some reason, then you might also want to reduce its prevalence through social pressures, laws etc to reduce the environmental factors which might push a person toward homosexuality. There are potentially many reasons; religious beliefs, fertility rates and babies for the next generation, you donít want them perving/hitting on you, preferring your children to be heterosexual to continue your blood line, or in the case of a warship captain, avoiding relationship issues amongst your seamen, whatever.

I wonder how much of all this is people wanting it only because some else has one and they canít have it. Maybe relationships should be banned. Soon all problems would end.
One Day Hero
25/08/2010
12:48:16 AM
Why are gay folk fighting for the right to get married when straights are less and less interested in the farking nonsense? Probably cause they've been taking shit from society forever and would like to send a big fcuk you to the powers that be........good on 'em.

I reckon the long fight will make 1st gen. gay marriages stronger
Wendy
25/08/2010
7:49:28 AM
On 24/08/2010 Sarah Gara wrote:

>
>I think that a religious gay person would be used to the church/society
>telling them they were wrong for being gay in the first place I wouldn't
>have thought that the revelation that they couldn't get married would really
>be all that much of a revelation - it would be frustrating though. I think
>I'd turn my back on the church if I were them I'd be amazed they hadn't
>already. I struggle with the whole concept of marriage which is really
>a religious thing - it's only relatively recently that it's gone secular...
>give it time and the slippery slope will slide..
>

I'm kind of amazed they don't turn they're back on it too. But we are also talking about an institution of which many branches won't have women priests as well but women still follow these churches.

I think kids are exposed to idea about marriage being what two people do when they love each other far younger than discourse about homosexuality. So it's entirely possible that they grow up with the idea of marriage long before they begin to question their sexuality and realise they aren't alone in that. And this would be particularly so for older people when there was even less representation in the media and no discussion of it in health classes.

I am still curious though - what are these values that the church holds that clashes with gay marriage? Can someone elucidate please? Various churches around the world are performing gay marriage ceremonies - how come it fits their values and not other churches?
Wendy
25/08/2010
8:00:24 AM
On 24/08/2010 rolsen1 wrote:

>On the thread closure, I think chockstone is a community (much like the
>church) and those who want to participate (much like getting married) need
>abide by the community expectations and the rules. If you don't want to
>follow the rules then don't join the club.
>

But you can question the rules of the club. I think the thread showed disapproval of the post - through the mod editing and through numerous (very numerous) posts expressing offence, dismay, horror etc. Those responses which were also abusive were also criticised and could have had a mod warning put on them in case any one read them independantly of the thread. It's called self moderation and demonstrates that chocky wasn't turning into bigotsville. If the thread had become predominantly all out gay bashing, that would be different.

Wendy
25/08/2010
8:08:43 AM
On 24/08/2010 Hendo wrote:
>Iím not 100% convinced about the Ďitís none of your businessí argument.
>People care about what other people are doing in their community and that
>isnít necessarily wrong. As for the slippery slope I wonder which sexual
>deviations are outside of the arguments about itís not hurting you, itís
>none of your business, these people are often otherwise normal etc. It
>seems pretty often that when people are found to have unusual deviations
>(eg paedophilia) those that know them are surprised as they otherwise seem
>normal and well-adjusted. I expect there are people around here more creative
>with these things than myself who could come up with a better list than
>incest, bestiality, consensual underage relationships, polygamy, concubines.

I realise that you are prone to playing devil's advocate, but I think gay people might be a little peeved at being put on these slippery slopes. I'll accept mutual and honest polygamy (which is not how polygamy is traditionally practiced) as potentially healthy, but the rest of the list come with a whole stack of problems that feed them which would take me another very long post to go through. Lets just say they are not healthy and happy for all concerned which is a rather different kettle of fish from being gay.

>
>The environment you are in can shape you to become almost anything. People
>here with very liberal views could easily be part of the Taliban had they
>been born in a few different desert countries. I donít put homosexuality
>outside this for a lot of people. Though I thankfully donít have first
>hand experience the reputations preceding prisons and the navy, they seem
>like extreme examples of people engaging in homosexual behaviour who most
>likely would otherwise not in Ďnormalí society. Of course this doesnít
>make it wrong, however if you think heterosexuality is preferable to homosexuality
>(not necessarily thinking homosexuality is bad) for some reason, then you
>might also want to reduce its prevalence through social pressures, laws
>etc to reduce the environmental factors which might push a person toward
>homosexuality. There are potentially many reasons; religious beliefs, fertility
>rates and babies for the next generation, you donít want them perving/hitting
>on you, preferring your children to be heterosexual to continue your blood
>line, or in the case of a warship captain, avoiding relationship issues
>amongst your seamen, whatever.

They might be "reasons" but they aren't necessarily "reasonable" - ie heterosexual people choose not to or can't have babies, ships have women on them as well, people can be hit on by both sexes ...
>
Wendy
25/08/2010
8:13:44 AM
I've also been thinking that it's kind of interesting that in a society where people are increasingly criticising govt intervention and regulation, people are accepting of it and even supporting of it in something as personal as their relationship. The govt regulates who you can marry, who can perform the ceremony, sets things that must be said in the ceremony, has official documents you must sign, parameters of what your relationship means in terms of economic dependence ...

rodw
25/08/2010
8:33:06 AM
I've always viewed the institution of marriage really as a religious union, and as an atheist I always thought like most religious ceremony a bit of a wank for no reason....however my partner was from the other side and always wanted to get married....so we compromised and went to a registry office and "officially" became married as I couldn't bring myself to step into the church and be that hypocritical but compromised because I love her.

We had a mortgage and that's much harder to nullify than a marriage anyway so didn't see the point of the whole exercise, but the boss felt the pressure from society to "justify" our union (mainly from family members). I don't give a shit if gay people want to marry not, I'd be more concerned about the reason anyone wants to do it....fine if you just want to celebrate your union (Though I'm not sure why it has to be marriage that does that)......but if you truly believe marriage will make a union stronger...your deluded.

 Page 2 of 12. Messages 1 to 20 | 21 to 40 | 41 to 60 | 61 to 80 | 81 to 100 | 101 to 120 | 121 to 140 | 141 to 160 | 161 to 180 | 181 to 200 | 201 to 220 | 221 to 235
There are 235 messages in this topic.

 

Home | Guide | Gallery | Tech Tips | Articles | Reviews | Dictionary | Forum | Links | About | Search
Chockstone Photography | Landscape Photography Australia | Australian Landscape Photography

Please read the full disclaimer before using any information contained on these pages.



Australian Panoramic | Australian Coast | Australian Mountains | Australian Countryside | Australian Waterfalls | Australian Lakes | Australian Cities | Australian Macro | Australian Wildlife
Landscape Photo | Landscape Photography | Landscape Photography Australia | Fine Art Photography | Wilderness Photography | Nature Photo | Australian Landscape Photo | Stock Photography Australia | Landscape Photos | Panoramic Photos | Panoramic Photography Australia | Australian Landscape Photography | Mothers Day Gifts | Gifts for Mothers Day | Mothers Day Gift Ideas | Ideas for Mothers Day | Wedding Gift Ideas | Christmas Gift Ideas | Fathers Day Gifts | Gifts for Fathers Day | Fathers Day Gift Ideas | Ideas for Fathers Day | Landscape Prints | Landscape Poster | Limited Edition Prints | Panoramic Photo | Buy Posters | Poster Prints