GAY TRUTH

The ABC once again on the eve of the voting on the Marriage Act has interviewed and promoted the liberal views of Robyn Whitaker who states that the Bible and God support homosexuality.  Whitaker, lectures in biblical studies at  Trinity College  at the  University of Melbourne .  We understand why the ABC has selected such a person, but what is the basis of her claim regarding homosexuality?  Whitaker ORIGINALLY believed homosexuality was a sin. But something changed. What happened? She was trained in liberal theological colleges in the USA .   "I have moved a very long way from not really seeing how someone could be gay and be a person of faith through to now saying I'm going to vote yes on a postal survey because I think there should be equality in marriage," she said.  WHITAKER NEXT ERROR IS REGARDING IMMEDIATE JUDGEMENT She says: "Living in the United States as same-sex marriage was legalised was a part of that transformation process. 

Here is my case for normal heterosexual Biblical marriage. First, the government has a vested interest in supporting relationships that propagate the human species in an environment most conducive to health and wellbeing. That environment is the freely chosen, lifelong, loving union of one man and one woman that is open to new life. Children have the right to be conceived, raised, and cared for in the loving union of a husband and wife. Studies and simple observations show having a mother and a father is best for children, and they also show that children raised by same-sex couples  suffer emotional damage . Like single parenting, this is something that governments should not promote, and, in fact, actively avoid or prevent. The abusive practice of in vitro fertilization, too common among heterosexual couples and virtually a necessity for same-sex couples who wish to raise non-adopted children, is no answer. IVF  treats a child as a commodity , producing children artificial

( MercatorNet ) -- Australia’s leading gay activist claims that a booklet defending natural marriage by the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference clearly breaches an anti-discrimination act. Worse, it exposes “vulnerable children” to “damaging messages”. Rodney Croome, national director of Australian Marriage Equality , is angry that Catholic schools in the state of Tasmania are distributing “ Don’t Mess with Marriage ”. Archbishop Julian Porteous plans to give 12,000 Tasmanian Catholic school children copies to pass on to their parents. Some teachers were horrified at the prospect of Catholic schools distributing Catholic literature, says Mr Croome: The Catholic Church has every right to express its views from the pulpit but it is completely inappropriate to enlist young people as the couriers of its prejudice. The booklet says to gay students in Catholic schools that their sexuality is wrong and that their aspiration to marry is a danger to marriage, religion and societ

Rainbow flag. Symbol of gay pride. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) During a large public survey on Homosexual marriage, when asked to rate the importance of same sex marriage as an issue, relative to five other topical issues, same sex marriage  ranked lowest in importance, even lower than the other social issue   of voluntary euthanasia. With 61% of the sample believing that the  same sex marriage debate is a distraction from more important  issues, and only 1 in 7 in strongly support of changing the Marriage  Act, there is a warning here for politicians to ensure that resources   and time are not diverted from other more pressing issues of  domestic importance. (6) The survey also shows that a significant proportion of those in favour of same sex marriage also share the same concerns as those not in   favour of same sex marriage, in the following areas: - How children are raised, with an acknowledgement that being raised by one’s biological mother and father is the norm which  should

A nationally representative sample of 1204 Australian adults was interviewed on the topic of same sex marriage . Selection for inclusion in the survey was random, and participation was voluntary. The survey showed that: (1) When questions were asked of a similar nature to those asked in widely published opinion polls , the results were much the same, namely, that 58% of Australians agree that same sex couples should have the right to marry . (2) However, the current survey went further and also asked if Australians support or oppose changing the Marriage Act to include same sex marriage. Only 49% supported changing the Marriage Act. (3) The current survey also found that Australians are quite divided in their opinion of this, with large gaps between men and women, between those with religious affiliations and non-religious people, between those with different political views, and between older and younger Australians. Those most in favour of change are women, younger Australians,

AUCKLAND , New Zealand ( LifeSiteNews.com ) - New Zealand has become the 13 th  country in the world to legalise same-sex marriage .  The Marriage ( Definition of Marriage ) Amendment Bill was passed in Parliament Wednesday night 77 votes to 44. Reaction from the supporters of the legislation has been jubilant.  Louisa Wall , who submitted the Private Member’s Bill ,  said , “This third reading is our road towards healing and including all citizens in our state institution of marriage regardless of their sex, sexual orientation or gender identity.” However, while supporters of the legislation are celebrating, many New Zealanders are concerned at how fast it has moved through the parliamentary process, and the effects it will have on the country.   “In passing the ‘shot-gun’ same-sex marriage bill, Parliament has chosen to reject the obvious cultural and natural character of marriage and the subsequent creation and care of children, and made marriage just about partnership,”

A poll of New Zealanders has found that only 47% now believe that Parliament should change the definition of marriage, and 43% believe that civil unions are sufficient for same sex couples . The poll also found strong support for laws protecting celebrants, churches and schools if the law is still pushed through. Almost half of NZ 'ers believe there should be a Referendum on the issue. In the poll of 1,000 people undertaken by Curia Market Research this month, respondents were asked: "In 2004, Parliament legislated to allow same sex couples to register a civil union, amending over 150 pieces of legislation to give legal rights and recognition to same-sex couples. Do you think Parliament should change the definition of marriage to allow same-sex couples to marry, or do you think civil unions are sufficient for same sex couples?" Only 47% said that Parliament should change the definition of marriage to allow same-sex couples to marry and 43% said they believed

New Zealand Parliament 's government administration committee is currently hearing submissions on the proposed law to allow same-sex couples to marry, the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill. During these hearings, some religious groups have expressed concern that the bill will force them to conduct marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples. This is despite the Human Rights Commission saying it will do no such thing and the bill's author saying that the bill is not meant to do so. However, the New Zealand Law Society , in its submission to the committee, has now thrown its weight behind these religious groups' fears. It then suggests that the bill be amended to make it clear that this outcome is not intended. If that change really is needed, then so be it, but I think the law society is wrong and the bill as it stands would not require anything new of any religious group. To explain why, I first need to say something about how the Marriage Act 1955 works.