Now playing at the Repenthouse ...
Knock knock goes the door ...
Who's that I say?
It's your ex son-in-law, aged 45, divorced from your eldest son.
Now he wants to date your youngest daughter
All perfectly legal.
No works for me
That's your opinion , Pete .
You don't want that shit in your face and that's your prerogative and I respect it.
But what about the pair of really nice chicks that I know in Albany and who are really in love .
Took one of them decades to get the courage to publicly declare her feelings for her partner . Best thing she ever did she reckons . Absolute liberation.
Now they want to declare their love for each other in a capacity recognised by officialdom . Nothing seedy , just a quiet ceremony.
But Tony Abbot doesn't want them to get married because he ASSUMES it'll somehow offend the omnipotent God that came up with the idea of homosexuality. In fact God was so into his idea that He / She made many, many homosexuals to walk the Earth.
Hey , you're from Northern Beaches aren't you Peter ?
Maybe you can tell me why protest voters that vote for One Nation are pilloried and ostracised, when the mental pygmies of the Warringah shire walk unmolested after granting a political stage to scum such as Tony Abbot and Bronwyn Bishop ?
How'd you pull off that little magic trick ?
I didn't voice an opinion, Blowin, I put forward a scenario.
So 2 x chicks from Albany are in love......so can you define love for the law?
Is it romantic sexual love, family love , friendship love or divine love?
No, I'll leave that up to you.
But you did voice an opinion peteb.
It was that, no works for you
that wasn't an opinion, thats a brainfart. you know, the thing that happens before you delete all your posts.
Abraham Lincoln talked about some Maths dude way back in the foggy years. Abe said that this Maths dude said that everything being equal, everthing else is bloody equal.
I hate Maths, like Latin, Greek, but apparently if you have to travel in space, you need Maths. Ok, what was I talkin about.
Just on a general level I don't understand what you said.
Bloody dot, Bloody hell!
We live in this wonderful world, where there is no death, murderous intent, children dieing. You don't have to pay that fucken sixety bucks after the due date for rego, Bloody Hell!
You sound like an American President! Sorry Churchill.
Thoughts, for fucksakes.
My thought is Get Fucked.
I will repeat Abe said there was this Maths dude, no matter what you say Pete with your trying to reach in the dark deep past of ancestors. This Maths dude said everthing, not everthing, but some things, now you have upset me.
Ruling Aliens' are near all invalid to stamp a Yes/No maybe whatever on your wrist.
Divorce lawyers take you to the cleaners before stating you were never legally Married.
Dissolve Parliament for a 2nd all age dead folk's multi vote with a result by 2019 holidays.
First the 2018 April Fool must eat his own words. PM decides who sets his own use by date.
Fashion Tip! Ditch that Bomber Jacket... keep going... Budgie Smugglers this Summer.
The ocean is full of garbage, everyone's making nukes , children are being abused, even by fake church people who pretend to follow God. Babies are even dumped in the bin before they are even born while others look to adopt, the forests are trashed and the unnatural greens just talk about unnatural gays. The banks and corporations want to micro chip us like dogs to enslave us and now the homosexuals want to get married just to really piss God off....It's getting harder to be an Optimist...Think I'll go for a surf.
"It's getting harder to be an Optimist...Think I'll go for a surf."
Can't surf here, it's flat, but I'm still feeling optimistic, Mr Optimist. A bunch of pollies put one cohort into a shit situation and the nation turned it into a cake. As David Marr said: "Look at the scoreboard."
All of a sudden I've got all these 45 year old gay blokes knocking on the farm gate .... fuck 'em, the dogs are off the chain from now on.
Well there you go the public has spoken.
Great for gay couples, but sadly just another contributing factor towards the new stolen generation :(
eeehh, such creeps. indo and peterb -- go fuck yourself.
I dont think there is any need for abuse Chook.
We all share different opinions, like i said earlier in this thread, although it's not what i had hoped for, i respect the majority has spoken and hope the law gets passed and we can move on.
new stolen generation? sorry indo im a bit slow, can you explain?
We are creating orphans ....
How the hell does it affect you if two blokes get married Indo D?
What a load of shite you've spoken
It doesn't affect me, I've never said it did.
In theory i don't have a problem with SSM but I have a problem with same sex couples being able to bring a child into this world where it's intentional not to have a mother and a father and where in many cases they may not even know their biological parent, to me that's not fair on the child and like it or not it is unnatural.
Yes unfortunately same sex couples can already adopt or do IVF etc however IMO same sex marriage will further normalise this scenario.
Anyway that's just my view, and I'm not really interested getting into a back and forth debate or abuse, i respect your view and it would be nice if you resected mine even if you don't agree with it.
better for kids to be raised by homos that love them than heteros that are fuckin retarted and are shit parents, and there are plenty of those.
you call that abuse? i haven't even started, you homphobic piece of shit.
i spent my weekends in the 80s being beaten up by groups of cowards who can't tell the diffeence between a gay person and a hetrosexual and didn't dare fight me one-on-one.
the vote is won, the tide has turned and i'm out for revenge big time. show your head anywhere here and i'm going to rip it off
cmon peterb, that was the biggest case of fake hurt,.......orphans? lol. you literally just talked about setting dogs onto 42 year old virgin males standing at your farm gate in search of your gay son. "where's the humanity" I hear you scream.
indo, i dunno about the truth to this vid, its just one womans tale. i'll reserve my judgement/opinion on that although im leaning toward it being a crock of christian shit. and i went to a catholic primary school so I've heard it all.
“Yes unfortunately same sex couples can already adopt” - Indo d
Seriously mate, the 1950’s just called. They want their closed mind way of thinking back.
Like Inzider said, if a kid has parents who love them unconditionally who gives a fuck if it’s two men who’s doing the loving. If they are in a happy healthy household that’s all that counts.
"Like Inzider said, if a kid has parents who love them unconditionally who gives a fuck if it’s two men who’s doing the loving. If they are in a happy healthy household that’s all that counts. "
Therein lies the problem , two men or women married , happy, loving , but what affect does it have breaking biological behaviour for the Kids?
I guess we will now have to wait and see....after watching,
I think kids are a lot more self aware and more educated and open to different things than they were 10-20-30 years ago.
I can’t see it being a bad thing, as long as it’s a happy loving home environment in which they’re being raised.
no need to wait and see sharkman. studies have already been done. some involving (shock horror) some 500 children. yes five hundred children!. i know right. this is truly amasing stuff in this day and age. and here i was about to believes indo's ladies sole sorry tale as plain fact on the matter.
dogs, farm gates, 42 year old virgins, orphans, child abominations......the list is growing.
People are going to believe what they are going to believe, but end of the day you cant argue with evolution, evolution is proof that the best combination to bring up a child is a mother and a father.
Two mothers or two fathers isn't the same as a father and a mother.
It's like yang and yang creates balance.
Same sex parenting is like ying and ying or yang and yang.
Perhaps before i had a child i might have had a different view or not felt so strongly, but after having a child and seeing my friends have children, i know what a father brings to bringing up a child is very different to what a mother brings.
Anyway its one of those things, where it's really a pointless discussion, i won't change anyones minds and nobody will change my mind..personally i just feel sorry for the kids.
Plenty of children have been raised in single sex households in every generation. Mothers and grandmothers, fathers and brothers. These are just incredibly normal situations which no-one would object to, but if the people involved are actually having sex, well Jesus H Christ, we can't have that can we?
@Blindboy I think most of those situations are not really comparable as in those scenarios they often have role models that take the place of a father or mother.
Also just like many kids are brought up by a single parent its not the end of the world if they have two fathers or two mothers, its just like starting a race at the back of the pack rather than up front.
However IMO it's more that the rights of the child to have a mother and father are taken away from them, i think thats sad and wrong.
I think in general as we move away from traditional family unit that are really based on how we have evolved from tribal cultures, we are seeing problems arise from this.
I notice this when i go back to Indonesia and i see how important family is, especially in the roles a parent and child plays, for instance the parent look after the child to a certain age then there is almost a transition where the child looks after the parents.
While in the west the parent looks after the child then in most cases the parents are left to fend on their own, and many are happy even just to put their parents in an old people home, really if we still had a strong family unit we wouldn't need to pay others to look after our parents when they are old.
It's really a natural thing, that has nothing to do with religion its more something that goes back to our roots more a tribal thing that we are losing.
indo writes.."evolution is proof that the best combination to bring up a child is a mother and a father."
is it? in my mind evolution is proof firstly that heterosexuality is preferred over homosexuality because it maximises procreation possibility, and secondly that a defenceless child needs protecting parents. i dont understand evolution to say or instruct anything about the optimal makeup of the family unit.
but if you have a link I will read it.
yes shock horror , 500 , wow , we could change the world with those figures.
It will be interesting to see over the next few generations the actual affect , of not having a masculine /Feminine upbringing , as with adopted kids , who are having problems not knowing their parents or parent.
Blindboy and Happy , just because a gay couple love each other , is not enough to bring up a child , in a balanced environment.
What kind of love do you determine as one that can successfully not affect children ?
There is family love, brother/sisterly love , lust/sex , friendship .....so do you think that if a brother and a sister love each other that's ok??
Are the political and church leaders arguing for the rights of children in the SSM debate also arguing for increased funding in: preschool education; child care; education in general; outdoor play space and parks in our increasingly cluttered cities; child and family welfare services; programs to address drug and alcohol dependence; domestic violence and the family court to name a few practical things that would go along way to improve children's lives in "traditional" families"? Because all these areas are collapsing under the strain of under funding.
While I do not doubt many ordinary folk have a genuine heart felt concern for children in this debate I am equally of the view that the issue of "child welfare" has been used cynically by religious conservatives in their ongoing "battle of ideas" .... and linking it to one of the religious conservatives key battle grounds namely education (curriculum and religious school funding).
If a kid had the choice of being bought up in a hetero house that was parented by dysfunctional abusive Loveless ma and pa, or a stable house with supportive loving homos, What do you reckon they would choose?
I find it hard to think they will choose a hetero house.
Um Happy never in the existence of the human race in any culture anywhere has a same sex couple ever been able to produce a family without the help of a third party.
That is the family unit, without the third party you have no family.
The whole purpose of life is for one thing only to continue the cycle, evolution is basically fine tuning ensuring the best chance of this possible.
If it was an advantage or just as good, we would have evolved to be able to reproduce alone or with the same sex.
Dot get me wrong homosexuality is not bad, and it's part of the human and animal kingdom, they have been trying to work out it's purpose forever and there is all kinds of theories most based on other animals or cultures, but really we don't know it's purpose, if perhaps there is even one, but one thing we do know from scientific and biological fact is it's reason is not to bring up children as a couple. (in a village type of environment where father and mother role models exist there is theory of them being helpers to mixed couples though)
Inzider if they were both good or decent parents I'm sure the child would choose the father and mother.
As far as i know, we don't take children from abusive family and give them to same sex couples, even if we were going to take children from abusive family's and re-home them, we would start with the most ideal situation possible which would be a caring mother and father.
Put lipstick on that pig !
The hard truth of the opposition to diversity amongst multicultural enclaves .
Let's wallpaper over that mess and continue pushing the barrow that it's the Australian anglosphere that's letting the progressive team down , what do you reckon ?
When Tony Abbot opposes SSM in the name of Christianity then he's an evil throwback that deserves public assault . When it's the Chinese and the Muslims it's " good people with good hearts whose opinions I respect ".
They got Sam Dastyari all wrong . He's not a terrorist . He's the embodiment of a politician that'll swallow any awkward lump of faeces for a vote or a buck.
Which is worse ?
Neither are welcome in a civilised world.
74% no vote in Blaxland is a very inconvenient truth.
Inconvenient indeed. What might be the political future of an Anglo member of state / federal parliament who promoted Yes when his non-Anglo electorate voted overwhelmingly NO?
Religion and politics .... they are now in the pot, like it or not.