Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by james darby on June 6, 2012 at 12:02pm

Hi Jan. you wrote "Caroline, certainly there are two camps,  but your assumption as to what they are is quite wrong.  They are simply those who are against same sex marriage and those who are for it."  I agree with you Jan. For my part I seek a political answer and am close to it now.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by peter cvek on June 6, 2012 at 6:57pm

.....errata... for " Antinous" ( the boy lover of the emperor Hadrian) read Ganyamede ( the boy lover of Jupiter/Zeus...

Peter Cvek

 
peter cvek said:

This is very true.. The Courts ARE co-operating with an agenda to change the family unit and structure and function, though they will not succeed in actually DISSOLVING the family unit and the heterosexual marital state itself ( as is the wish of the homosexual lobby). There is a simple reason for this nefarious agenda to change the family, and it is largely a historical and philosophical one... It is not Christian or Judaic principles which form the basis of our Court/ Legal systems ( though the Legal system has been influenced by, and tempered with, Judeo-Christian principles and ethics ever since the time of Justinian and his code of Laws), but rather the ancient Roman Law and the Laws of the democratic Greeks, which were invented and codified by the Philosophers, such as Plato, Solon and Pythagoras ( the " father" of modern philosophy).. The ancient Philosophers in the main believed that the marital unit was a "complement" to the state, rather than an absolute " necessity", and that children born were defacto " wards of the State" whose education was entrusted NOT to the parents, but to the State.. The pagan philosophers almost universally regarded the State as supreme, as long as it abided by the tenets of Philosophy... Plato, Aristotle, Socrates and Pythagoras, who are taught in ALL our universities and education systems, including Religious Seminaries, ( all the Philosophers tolerated and supported sodomy) both conservative and liberal, high and low, also sanctioned paedophilia in the education system of the State.. Plato regarded the depravity of paedophilia as the " highest expression of love", since it was a direct imitation ( in his warped mind) of the sodomitical amours of Zeus, particularly with his male-boy lover Antinous ( Antinous was also known as Aquarius, from which the word " Queer" is coined, and from whose name and legacy the " Age of Aquarius", or the " Age of the Queer" is delineated- the so-called " New Age Movement")... " As the gods are, so are the people" is an adage that rings true to this day... What we honour most is what we become most like.. The New Age Movement crosses ALL political boundaries, and has insinuated itself from the cradle to the grave by,( as THE great child of philosophy and the offspring of the ancient mysteries, particularly the Bacchanalian and the Eleusian) usurping the right of the parents and immediate family to educate the child, and immersing the child from infancy in an educational system that is run by the amoral and immoral tenets of pagan philosophy... The National Socialism of Sparta also regarded the education of the child as the duty of the State ( Hitler replicated this ideal), and the International Socialism of Plato and Pythagoras likewise furthers the tenets of State ownership and education of the child ( which the Bolsheviks and Stalin replicated)... When the rearing and education of the child is removed from the parents and immediate family, then the cancer of philosophy is let loose to run rampant and devour every healthy moral and ethic that the parents would naturally and religiously endow their offspring with.... When we realize that Philosophy is the root of this evil agenda ( Pythagoras being a disciple of the FIRST pagan philosopher, Zoroaster, who was Biblically known as Nimrod), then we may see that until our children are weaned away from State sanctioned education and curriculums and returned to parental-based, supported and sanctioned education, that there is little hope of keeping them within the bonds of future marital love and familial fidelity, or within the protective parameters of morality, truth, honesty and justice... As the gods are, so are the people.... A tree is known by its fruits... The Courts are merely furthering in their agenda to change the family the ancient amoral and immoral tenets of the philosophers, from which we need not expect any succour or relief... Though the family unit will not entirely dissolve outwardly, it has already disintegrated " inwardly", as we all know from sad experience.. The answer will never be found or tolerated in our Fabian Socialist run education systems, from which future Judges and Lawyers are drawn, which further their agenda by direct appeal to the Philosophers- all the way back to Zoroaster... The answers lie elsewhere: Naturally in our conscience, and Supernaturally in Theology...

Peter Cvek

Peter Cvek

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by james darby on June 8, 2012 at 11:46am

http://www.henrymakow.com/samesex_adoption_is_child_abus.html

The net effect of homosexuals demanding that they have "equal" rights to raise children must cause a division in society. The education system has expanding from utilising brain washing techniques to collectivise children into mind bending systems that deny the existance of the difference between male and female.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jan Courtney on June 8, 2012 at 11:56am

No matter what they say -  it still requires a female ovum and a male spermatazoa to creat another human being.

 

Male + Female =

 

Male + Male =  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by peter cvek on June 8, 2012 at 1:06pm

James, you hit the nail on the head with the word " collectivise"... The doctrine of political and educational Collectivism, where the State deems it their right and duty to own and control the land and all means of production, and to convert all children into de fact wards of the state ( through a collectivist approach to education and rearing), is one that ALL socialist ideologies, whether National or International, have based their existence on over the centuries.. The social blight of " Collectivism" has at its core CONTROL of society, which it can only achieve by keeping the populace constantly guessing, constantly pursuing ease and pleasure ( as Epicurus taught) but never finding, constantly absorbed in recreations and passtimes that can never truly fulfill the inner yearnings of humanity... This the State can only achieve by contravening and contorting the natural into the unnatural, namely, attempting to create of women men, and of men women.. This process of weakening humanity through immorality and indulgence for the purpose of control, is achieved by the alchemical-like process of hermaphroditisation. All the Philosophers taught and practised this. The pagan Gnostics ( under the guise of the journey through Hades of Pistis Sophia) and the disciples of Orpheus ( of " underworld" fame) all taught that social and personal morality had to be progressively shed in order to pass the individual and society "through the several levels of hades/hell" unscathed and eventually metamorphose the individual and, by reflex, society, into an effete hermaphrodite... They term this " social and mental alchemy"... The death knell of all morality, and of society itself...

Peter Cvek

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jan Courtney on June 8, 2012 at 2:05pm

Peter,  I prefer to keep it simple:

 

 

 

Same-sex marriage is NOT a “conscience issue” any more than considering the arbitrary removal of children from their biological parents could be considered a “conscience issue.”

Marriage protects a child’s fundamental right to know his/her brothers, sisters, grandparents, and medical history.

Marriage is the natural, compound, biological right:

-  of one man and one woman to marry; and then
-  to found a family, i.e. to have children in a manner that protects the fundamental right of children to know and be raised by their biological parents, to know their biological brothers and sisters, grandparents, ancestors and their family medical history.

In this way, marriage means the union of one man and one woman, as well as the right to form a family in a way that protects the rights of children.

Trying to redefine the word marriage would be like the Federal government passing a law to redefine the word vegetarian to include meat eaters, in order to avoid discrimination against meat eaters. Such a law doesn’t change the meaning of vegetarian, it destroys the meaning of “vegetarian”, a word that explains the difference between a person who doesn’t eat meat and a person who includes meat in their diet.

According to the Institute of Family Studies 73.6% of children are being reared by their biological mother and father. In this way, the biological rights of the great majority of Australian children are being respected.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by peter cvek on June 8, 2012 at 2:08pm

... nothing wrong with the obviously simple, Jan, as long as we are aware that the hidden roots are always complex and intricately intertwined, and generally beyond the simply obvious...

Peter Cvek

Jan Courtney said:

Peter,  I prefer to keep it simple:

 

 

 

Same-sex marriage is NOT a “conscience issue” any more than considering the arbitrary removal of children from their biological parents could be considered a “conscience issue.”

Marriage protects a child’s fundamental right to know his/her brothers, sisters, grandparents, and medical history.

Marriage is the natural, compound, biological right:

-  of one man and one woman to marry; and then
-  to found a family, i.e. to have children in a manner that protects the fundamental right of children to know and be raised by their biological parents, to know their biological brothers and sisters, grandparents, ancestors and their family medical history.

In this way, marriage means the union of one man and one woman, as well as the right to form a family in a way that protects the rights of children.

Trying to redefine the word marriage would be like the Federal government passing a law to redefine the word vegetarian to include meat eaters, in order to avoid discrimination against meat eaters. Such a law doesn’t change the meaning of vegetarian, it destroys the meaning of “vegetarian”, a word that explains the difference between a person who doesn’t eat meat and a person who includes meat in their diet.

According to the Institute of Family Studies 73.6% of children are being reared by their biological mother and father. In this way, the biological rights of the great majority of Australian children are being respected.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rory Donnellan on June 8, 2012 at 8:49pm

Gay marriage is a natural progression after divorce and contraception become accepted.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Malcolm Fenton on June 8, 2012 at 11:40pm

Agreed Rory ....... another increment in a downward spiral and often the final gasp of decaying civilizations down through history.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jan Courtney on June 9, 2012 at 9:05am

Rory,  That's an extreme and, in my opinion, incorrect view.

It's better for a couple to divorce than destroy one another, and their children, by staying together if the marriage is unworkable.  People do make mistakes and marry the wrong person sometimes.  Doesn't mean they are homosexual.

Rory Donnellan said:

Gay marriage is a natural progression after divorce and contraception become accepted.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by james darby on June 9, 2012 at 3:00pm

Hi Rory, You say "Gay marriage is a natural progression after divorce and contraception become accepted." Contraception and divorce have nothing whatsoever to do with homosexuals wishing to marry themselves as man and wife. Despite many homosexuals still owning the genes that say "be a parent" and "reproduce" there is nothing that does not have a cost. Persons who have gone down the path of sodomy naturally want to feel normal and want acceptence for the continuance of their lifestyle choice. Anything such as marrying  helps them in their desire to feel normal. Suffer the little children. The very least that a society should do for the children is to protect them from a personal acceptence of a homosexual lifestyle being normal behaviour. Marriage is for husband and wife and the best thing to teach children is that "should you contemplate a homosexual lifestyle society will not allow you to adopt children. A child does not have a choice who their parents are and you have the choice about the course of your life. If you want to be a parent one day fall in love with a person of the opposite sex and marry."

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rory Donnellan on June 9, 2012 at 10:26pm

Jan,

Your arguments with regard to divorce are beginning to sound similar to those of King Henry VIIIth!

Jan Courtney said:

Rory,  That's an extreme and, in my opinion, incorrect view.

It's better for a couple to divorce than destroy one another, and their children, by staying together if the marriage is unworkable.  People do make mistakes and marry the wrong person sometimes.  Doesn't mean they are homosexual.

Rory Donnellan said:

Gay marriage is a natural progression after divorce and contraception become accepted.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• …
• 18
• Next ›
• Page