“Providing a reality check, Radical Women spokeswoman Alison Thorne told the Melbourne rally that marriage was an oppressive institution designed to condemn women to lives of slavery, but same-sex couples should nevertheless be equally entitled to it. She then led the crowd in a chant: ”˜Kevin Rudd, ALP, we demand equality’.”
Wow, what a great quote. I am sure many fellow homosexuals wished she had simply shut up. And many may be kicking themselves for allowing the MSM to pick up on this juicy quote. Of course it says nothing new. Those of us who are not reliant on a censorious MSM know full well that many, if not most, homosexuals are not even interested in marriage.
Indeed, there has been a longstanding debate amongst homosexuals over the question of homosexual marriage. Some are in favour, some are opposed, and there are many options in between. As one example, one Victorian leader put it this way: “Obviously while there is a lack of unanimity about gay marriage, our human rights must be the same as everyone else’s. If someone wants to get married or doesn’t want to get married, it’s their choice.”
One Australian homosexual lobby group has actually split over this issue. Two committee members have resigned from the New South Wales Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby, claiming it has not pushed hard enough for marriage rights. But the Lobby said that marriage reform was “not a priority”.
They don’t want what normal people have. They don’t want them to have it. Misery loves company. Old story, new actors.
[blockquote] Surely we can come up with something better: semi-marriage or quarter-marriage, which would narrow the field down to eight. Or a casual, part-time or temporary marriage. Or even a flexitime marriage. [/blockquote]
Yep, can see it now. The Gen Con ’12 push will be for clergy in flexitime marriages! Slippery slope to Hell.Enjoy the slide.
I read that in Toronto (the San Francisco of Canada) the percentage of homosexual couples opting for “marriage” was in the single digits. There was an initial rush then a big yawn.
This article confirms something I’ve long suspected: that [i] in general [/i] homosexuals really want, not necessarily to be able to marry as heterosexuals do, but complete societal acceptance and even approval of their lifestyle and their chosen identity as homosexuals (there do seem to be some same-sex couples who really do want to get married).
But the article also points to something far more serious and sinister: that what many of the more radical activists are demanding and working toward is the redefinition of social structures altogether — that is, the destruction of the created order as we know it. If this is true — many of us may be uncomfortable with talk of the influence of the Prince of Darkness, but such developments as this ought perhaps to make us sit up and pay more attention:
[blockquote] American homosexual activist Michelangelo Signorile makes similar remarks, urging activists to “fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely … The most subversive action lesbians and gay men can undertake – and one that would perhaps benefit society – is to transform the notion of ‘family’ entirely.†[/blockquote]
Laura, are you really supprised at this? Larry