Marriage redefinition and Childrens rights

It's weird how those who are most religious appear to have the least 'Christian' morals of all on this matter. The church teaches all that love thy neighbour and caring and compassion stuff yet are willing to oppress a minority group for no apparent reason other than it's supposedly 'wrong' or 'unnatural'.

Bridge93 wrote: »

It's weird how those who are claim to be most religious appear to have the least 'Christian' morals of all on this matter. The church teaches all that love thy neighbour and caring and compassion stuff yet are willing to oppress a minority group for no apparent reason other than it's supposedly 'wrong' or 'unnatural'.

FYP there Bridge, and on that note, I would urge people to consider the fact that just because those people who are opposed to marriage equality have either left the discussion of their own volition, or have been made to leave the discussion because they were unwilling to engage in the first place, I would hope that the complacency rot doesn't set in among the yes campaign again.

I've seen this complacency in action with people I understood were friends of mine who spoke all the right words about being young, atheist, liberal, pro-lgbt and all the rest of it, and it was my own fault that I became complacent enough to believe that when we were having a conversation about homosexuality and so on, I happened to mention that I'd played tonsil tennis with a couple of guys when I was younger. Their reactions were fairly telling. Suddenly - it was ok for them to be pro-lgbt, but they had made complacent presumptions about me too that I was reserved and conservative and butter wouldn't melt in my mouth (in fairness I'm normally dressed like a JW with the white shirt, navy tie and black trousers ).

They couldn't hide their distaste upon suddenly being presented with this new information which they couldn't process as it didn't fit in with their preconceptions. Their immediate reaction was to recoil in horror and almost synchronously pronounce "ew!". The friendship really didn't last much longer after that unfortunately. They weren't bad people, they just hadn't given much thought to what they were saying or supporting, and they liked to assume that nobody else could be as liberal and opinionated and all the rest of it as they were.

I've seen it in this thread alone where people have even taken each other up wrong where they both support marriage equality, but due to their preconceived ideas about other people, it's caused miscommunication and people taking each other up wrong and attacking other people (not talking about me, I've thicker skin than an elephant, because I've had to grow it due to constant abuse when I didn't fit with people's preconceived ideas - they don't bloody like it!), but I've seen people who are voting yes in this referendum try to give their opinion and being taken up wrong, and then they leave the discussion.

I understand that naturally this is an issue that people are going to take personally, and they're going to jump to conclusions and make snap judgments about people, but I would urge those people that before they react, before they retaliate, give the other person a chance at least to explain themselves. Put yourself in their shoes and try and imagine how you would feel if someone were to jump down your throat when you tried to express your thoughts. I understand that of course it's difficult sometimes, but if you're looking for people to understand you, the onus is upon you to show other people understanding first. If upon further discussion it becomes clear that they are diametrically opposed to your position, then instead of abusing them, just walk away, because after that point you're just wasting your time and you're only going to upset yourself even further.

indy_man wrote: »

OK, I have many views lending to a no vote but the main one is that every child is entitled to a mothers love. Even better is the love of both a mother and a father.

And every person isn't entitled to have their relationship treated equally in the eyes of the State? Bearing in mind as has been said a million times at this stage that gay couples can already raise children and this referendum will not change this either way. And has nothing to do with this referendum.

You started this thread with this -

indy_man wrote: »

If you get to watch all this are you still 100% sure redefining marriage in our constitution is the correct thing to do? It would be best if you watched it before slamming it, if you don't watch it at all probably best not comment.

And now, what, nearly 80 pages of discussion later when those opposed to marriage equality are fairly thin on the ground, you still come out with this -

indy_man wrote: »

OK, I have many views lending to a no vote but the main one is that every child is entitled to a mothers love. Even better is the love of both a mother and a father.

Now I'm not suggesting you're simply trolling or anything, but your point has been addressed at least, at least ten times and more in your own thread already.

The Sindo wrote:

At that stage Breda wondered if it was all worth it, because, as she puts it: "It was having an impact on the people whom you love very much."

Oh, the irony...

indy_man wrote: »

OK, I have many views lending to a no vote but the main one is that every child is entitled to a mothers love. Even better is the love of both a mother and a father.

To be honest I find this harping on about the special, separate virtues of mothers slightly patronising. Because we give birth to the child does not automatically make us better parents or make our love for our children superior to that of their father. My OH is actually the better parent in many respects in our relationship, he has more patience and more imagination when playing by a long way, he is more even tempered in the face of adversity and more pleasantly responsive to issues that occur between 1 and 7am.

I find that this argument from the no side insults both mothers and fathers. It is both reminiscent of a time when women were supposed to be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen and it is insulting to all the fathers who are excellent parents.

Further on from that, if my OH was gay and little Kiwi were the result of me acting as surrogate for him and his husband, I cannot think of any way that Little Kiwi would be disadvantaged so long as the husband provided the same level of parenting as I do. There is not one thing that I can think of that I provide my child as a mother that a man with similar emotional connections to him could not do. And as I say that, I consider myself to be a very good mother.