First Australian gay couples to legal...

First Australian gay couples to legally marry

There are 1725 comments on the Chambersburg Public Opinion story from Dec 5, 2013, titled First Australian gay couples to legally marry. In it, Chambersburg Public Opinion reports that:

A state lawmaker and his partner plan to fly 3,500 kilometers across Australia to become one of the nation's first same-sex couples to legally marry at an after-midnight ceremony in the Australian capital.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chambersburg Public Opinion.

Since: Feb 14

Collingwood, Australia

#1843 Feb 11, 2014
Mojo wrote:
<quoted text>thats good coming from the fool who wrote this
Gus Dynamite wrote:
I know, I often find I forget to breath during scary films.
And? Your retort has nothing to do with my words quoted and nothing makes sense out of context.

Good grief, it seems that even when idiots try harder, they only embarrass themselves further.

Are you 14?

Since: Feb 14

Collingwood, Australia

#1844 Feb 11, 2014
Look at the dumb asses who can't remain on topic and must resort to petty insults - and not very good ones.

They probably have no idea that they're being laughed at by smarter people than them.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#1846 Feb 11, 2014
Mojo wrote:
Rise & shine poofters,& I'm not talking about polishing your knobs & sodomising your mates either,I'm talkin earning cash,not licking arse's cos your weak arse lickers & arse worshippers,arse's are for shitting only you devious freaks who love to lick & root mens arse's,you are a sick,sick,sick minority that makes the majority cringe with your un-natural behaviour,now put on your high heels,lipstick & evening dress & throw your handbags at Mojo
Not worth the effort.....

“Take Topix Back From Trolls”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#1847 Feb 11, 2014
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
Not worth the effort.....
Please hit the abuse button on that Troll and report it every time it posts it's ignorant foul mouthed crap. I'm convinced he mates with pigs for a living, the sheep wouldn't have him.

“Take Topix Back From Trolls”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#1850 Feb 11, 2014
Straight Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
Be aware folks that the gobblers of brownpopsicles LOVE to taddle tale and cry like little girls.
Says the unregistered waste of cowardly human skin. Got a very sick interest in all things Gay do ya?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#1856 Feb 11, 2014
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Rights are part of a seamless whole. For them to survive the mood-swings of the madding crowd, they need to be entrenched within the system as a whole.
We see again an attempt to dumb down marriage to a contract. Managed by the government no less.

Marriage has always been a relationship between a man and woman with inseparable integrity with all cultures and religions.

At its most basic essence, marriage is rooted as a cross cultural constraint on functioning evolutionary mating behavior.

Ss couples are a failure of mating behavior making ss marriage an oxymoron at the most foundational level.

If you remove procreation as a key purpose of marriage, you give special rights to select couples that are prohibited for no reason to an individual or any number of individuals. Prejudicial discrimination.

“Take Topix Back From Trolls”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#1857 Feb 11, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
We see again an attempt to dumb down marriage to a contract. Managed by the government no less.
Marriage has always been a relationship between a man and woman with inseparable integrity with all cultures and religions.
At its most basic essence, marriage is rooted as a cross cultural constraint on functioning evolutionary mating behavior.
Ss couples are a failure of mating behavior making ss marriage an oxymoron at the most foundational level.
If you remove procreation as a key purpose of marriage, you give special rights to select couples that are prohibited for no reason to an individual or any number of individuals. Prejudicial discrimination.
Right, barren couples, couples who refuse to breed, and senior citizens should not be allowed to marry. That makes perfect sense. NOT!

I have yet to read or hear wedding vows religious or not that require couples to breed. You're whacked.

Since: Feb 14

Collingwood, Australia

#1858 Feb 11, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
We see again an attempt to dumb down marriage to a contract. Managed by the government no less.
Marriage has always been a relationship between a man and woman with inseparable integrity with all cultures and religions.
At its most basic essence, marriage is rooted as a cross cultural constraint on functioning evolutionary mating behavior.
Ss couples are a failure of mating behavior making ss marriage an oxymoron at the most foundational level.
If you remove procreation as a key purpose of marriage, you give special rights to select couples that are prohibited for no reason to an individual or any number of individuals. Prejudicial discrimination.
Marriage is a contract, without the contract and government sanction you cannot be married,

Marriage has now changed to include same sex unions in most civilized places on earth. For Australia to lag behind displays our barbarianism.

The purpose of marriage is not to procreate - it's rather easy to procreate without being married.

Your argument fails.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#1859 Feb 11, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
We see again an attempt to dumb down marriage to a contract. Managed by the government no less.
Marriage has always been a relationship between a man and woman with inseparable integrity with all cultures and religions.
At its most basic essence, marriage is rooted as a cross cultural constraint on functioning evolutionary mating behavior.
Ss couples are a failure of mating behavior making ss marriage an oxymoron at the most foundational level.
If you remove procreation as a key purpose of marriage, you give special rights to select couples that are prohibited for no reason to an individual or any number of individuals. Prejudicial discrimination.
Gus Dynamite wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage is a contract, without the contract and government sanction you cannot be married,
Marriage has now changed to include same sex unions in most civilized places on earth. For Australia to lag behind displays our barbarianism.
The purpose of marriage is not to procreate - it's rather easy to procreate without being married.
Your argument fails.
How romantic.

Get a lawyer if you want a contract.

I didn't say the purpose of marriage is to procreate. In fact, I said it constrains procreation.

However, you ignore the fundamental function of marriage that makes ss marriage irrefutably an oxymoron.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#1860 Feb 11, 2014
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
How romantic.
Get a lawyer if you want a contract.
I didn't say the purpose of marriage is to procreate. In fact, I said it constrains procreation.
However, you ignore the fundamental function of marriage that makes ss marriage irrefutably an oxymoron.
Don't need a lawyer, Greg, we have state and federal recognition of marriage.

I'm just as married as you are, with the exception that there are two vaginae in your marriage, and none in mine.

Since: Feb 14

Collingwood, Australia

#1861 Feb 11, 2014
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
We see again an attempt to dumb down marriage to a contract. Managed by the government no less.
Marriage has always been a relationship between a man and woman with inseparable integrity with all cultures and religions.
At its most basic essence, marriage is rooted as a cross cultural constraint on functioning evolutionary mating behavior.
Ss couples are a failure of mating behavior making ss marriage an oxymoron at the most foundational level.
If you remove procreation as a key purpose of marriage, you give special rights to select couples that are prohibited for no reason to an individual or any number of individuals. Prejudicial discrimination.
<quoted text>
How romantic.
Get a lawyer if you want a contract.
Marriage is most definitely a contract and there's no getting around it. You can't be married without legal sanction of the government.

You can have all the ceremonies you like, but without the signed contract, it's all just for show.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#1862 Feb 11, 2014
Gus Dynamite wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage is most definitely a contract and there's no getting around it. You can't be married without legal sanction of the government.
You can have all the ceremonies you like, but without the signed contract, it's all just for show.
And the bottom line?

Ss couples will only ever be a mutually sterile, pointlessly duplicate gendered half of marriage.

Some contract.

Since: Feb 14

Collingwood, Australia

#1863 Feb 11, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
And the bottom line?
Ss couples will only ever be a mutually sterile, pointlessly duplicate gendered half of marriage.
Some contract.
Legal recognition of love, companionship, support is not pointless. Whether you think it is or not - for any consenting couple.

You;re fighting a losing battle.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#1864 Feb 11, 2014
Gus Dynamite wrote:
<quoted text>
Legal recognition of love, companionship, support is not pointless. Whether you think it is or not - for any consenting couple.
You;re fighting a losing battle.
KiMerde has already lost the battle here in the US. That's why he has to extend his powerless tentacles to Australia.

Since: Feb 14

Collingwood, Australia

#1865 Feb 11, 2014
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
KiMerde has already lost the battle here in the US. That's why he has to extend his powerless tentacles to Australia.
It must just be eating them up inside - at least their hatred is starting to become internalized so they can leave the rest of us out of their psychosis.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#1867 Feb 11, 2014
lowprofile wrote:
<quoted text>
Never mind,maybe when you grow up and get a brain you will probably see things differently, but for now it's back to school, I think the reason you think these gays are OK is probably because you have some little gay playmates at school??
Ooh, highly predictable "level of education" insult. Problem is, most gay men have a higher level of education than the average male.

It's funny, because it's true.

Since: Feb 14

Collingwood, Australia

#1868 Feb 11, 2014
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
Ooh, highly predictable "level of education" insult. Problem is, most gay men have a higher level of education than the average male.
It's funny, because it's true.
What I find insulting is that the it's level of intelligence prevents it from insulting me to the level I'd like. I think if you're going to insult someone, be scathing - that person is so disappointing!

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#1871 Feb 11, 2014
lowprofile wrote:
<quoted text>
My post wasn't directed to you dumbo!
Oh how very bourgeois of me to reply to a comment in a public thread.
Protocol should have dictated that I behave less pedestrian.

As if.

Since: Feb 14

Collingwood, Australia

#1872 Feb 11, 2014
lowprofile wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem is you are too stupid to insult, what was it I said before,"educated beyond your own intelligence" By the way when are you going to stop leeching off your Mum and Dad and provide for yourself ?
I think I made it clear that your insults are below my intelligence and I challenged you to up your game.

Also, it's cute that you think my parents fund my education because I never actually said that they did - you assumed and went with it.

Since: Feb 14

Collingwood, Australia

#1874 Feb 11, 2014
lowprofile wrote:
<quoted text>
"Your intelligence" are you serious, your posts resemble something blurted out by a primary school kid, you are going to have to be able to do a LOT better than the rubbish you have already posted.
I note you seem to have fitted in well in this thread with your new f*ggot friends, that is very telling in itself.
Never-the-less, I do wish you would try a bit harder when you try to insult me, unless your intention is to do so by not trying very hard.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Opinion Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Are anti-Trump media to blame for the Alexandri... 14 min Lawrence Wolf 175
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 1 hr Frindly 6,890
News Region needs off-leash park for dog mingling (Jan '08) 2 hr AmPieJam UncleSam 100
News James T. Hodgkinson showed all the signs before... 2 hr Red Crosse 51
News David Manley: Dona t sell us short 2 hr rangemaster 5
News Lobbyist Money + Right-Wing Extremists = Tea Party (Apr '09) 3 hr AmPieJam UncleSam 24
News Get ready ... stink bug infestation likely to b... (Feb '11) 3 hr weaponX 41
More from around the web