Activists condemn Christian Lobby
The Australian Coalition for Equality has lashed back at claims by the Australian Christian Lobby that moves to redefine classifications for children through the Omnibus Bill are based on biological fiction.
The Australian Christian Lobby last week opposed the Federal Government’s move to redefine the notion of children in several Acts to cover the children of same-sex couples.
ACL believes children should be given every opportunity in life to have both a mother and a father and that the state should not facilitate the deliberate creation of children who are effectively left motherless or fatherless, ACL chief of staff Lyle Shelton said.
Shelton also claimed that any attempt to define children as the product of same-sex couples was based on biological nonsense.
Biology says it takes a man and a woman to produce a child, he said.
We should not be writing biological fiction into Commonwealth legislation, particularly when the Government’s aims can be achieved by applying a dependency test. This bizarre social engineering is completely unnecessary to achieve the aims of this bill.
Gay rights activists from the ACE have responded angrily to these claims. Groups like the Australian Christian Lobby want to return us to a time when children were legally penalised if their parents weren’t married, ACE spokesperson Rodney Croome said. Families headed by same-sex couples are a social fact and deserve the same legal rights and protections enjoyed by other families.
chris – buggeroffbigot!!!???
Seriously, that’s not very nice. I may not see eye to eye with gay people on gay issues but I wouldn’t say something like that to you or something similar to gay people. I’m not a homophobe and I’m certainly not in the closet.
I post here because I find this site interesting, and it’s certainly fascinating hearing different points of views on various subjects. I don’t agree with most of them, but that’s what makes it interesting.
Still, maybe I’m better off spending my time elsewhere.
james as a heterosexual ( or closet homo ) homophobe why do you bother posting on a site that is about and for the gay and lesbian community….buggeroffbigot!!!
Thanks Andrew M. Potts – makes a lot more sense now, although rather off-topic.
VIC – maybe if you spelt it correctly in the first place I wouldn’t need “a dictionary” or to “find somebody who can explain it if you don’t understand something”
Try searching “parthenogenesis” instead.
Vic – I don’t hate anyone and I have as much of a right to express my opinion here as you do.
My dictionary doesn’t contain parthnogenesis, nor does wikipedia have an entry for it. Perhaps you could explain a bit more about it?
Now James, all you’re doing is showing your ignorance.
Please don’t use this site to sling outdated values about and attack people when you don’t know what you’re talking about. The is a community news paper, not a place for you to preach your stupidity and hatred.
Buy yourself a dictionary or find somebody who can explain it if you don’t understand something. I don’t need to help my argument. I am doing fine with just the facts.
J. Yung – the point of having a family is to produce a family. This is not biologically possible with two men or two women. Personally I wouldn’t classify having a clone as the same as producing a family, nor would society in general I assume. Of course some heterosexual families are dyfunctional – big deal. Dysfunctional relationships are not confined to heterosexuals. So this is a mute point.
Vic – I’m not sure what parthnogenesis means. But I’ve never heard of “two women or one woman” being able to make a baby; wether in a lab or not. Seriously Vic, you are not helping your argument with this sort of bizzare talk.
James- Marriage are not as dead as the laws of maths, we are not made to be brain dead logical. The point of getting married is love, and the point of having a family is to love the members within in family, no matter the sexuality context of the family. frightfully, there are many heterosexual families who can’t even provide the basic security and happiness for their children, which in most cases, left their children both motherless and fatherless, literally. Oh also, biologically, we CAN produce a baby, with the help of technology- We should welcome the wonders of cloning technology, replicating God’s wondrous creation.
I’ve always felt it strange that Jesus, born into a country under Roman occupation which was also home to a large Pagan Greek minority had not one word to say on the subject of homosexuality. As its toleration was a huge point of difference between Greco-Roman and first century AD Jewish culture, you think it would have been worth mentioning if it was an issue of importance to the man. Christians have no more business opposing gay marriage or same sex parented families than they do atheist marriage or Hindu marriage (of course they tried that in South Africa until a young lawyer named Gandhi did something about it).
Andrew M Potts – step parent type of families are generally far from ideal. Your example of the rapist doesn’t deserve a comment.
Tony – I’m no member of the ACL but please don’t talk about the inclusiveness of Jesus without also talking about the definition of sin.
Seriously, you can put whatever spin you like on gay relationships and families trying oh so hard to pretend that they are the same as traditional arrangements, etc. but it’s like trying to convince people that 1+1=3. The laws of maths say that it doesn’t and never will no matter how much you may want it to.
Dear Andrew M. Potts. Thank you for your good relevant, common-sense points. Meanwhile, as we can see (and unfortunately, as per usual) there are many people who call themselves ‘Christians’ who conveniently forget Jesus’ view of love and inclusiveness of everyone. It’s these ‘pseudo-Christians’ (who are full of self importance, hatred and exclusionism), who are blasphemous, as they have nothing in common with Jesus’ views as mentioned above, hence calling themselves ‘Christian’ is a blasphemy in itself (however, Jesus wouldn’t hate them back with the venom that these hateful people have, he is far more understanding of these negative people, and the rest of humanity, than they will ever want to be to the rest of all things living). These ‘Clayton’s-Christians’ give good loving true ‘Christians’ a bad name. It’s sad how they blame Christianity for all of their own biased ideas, hiding behind the Bible, twisting their interpretations, and using the Bible to justify their hatred from their twisted views. Jesus doesn’t hate, so how can theses people feel so comfortable and associate themselves with the goodness of true ‘Christianity’? Plus how would ‘Milly’ know that Jesus really said “there is never a place for a valid homosexual relationship in Christianity”? Like the rest of us, you never been with Jesus… that’s only your interpretation of what you’ve read or heard from other biased hateful exclusionary individuals. To all haters out there, please stop hating… you might learn something, and in turn experience and enjoy a real platonic love of your fellow human-beings, as per Jesus’ teachings. Goodnight.
Seems like the Christian Lobby is everywhere these days, even monitoring and responding to emails from gay and lesbian newspapers online. Are we no longer safe from their twisted outdated ravings even here?
I would have gone into the matter of when an egg is fertilized senerio a little more, but my point was missed by most right at the beginning, I shan’t be waisting my time on them and their paranoid fundemental views. Two women or one woman can actually make a baby, James, its called parthnogenesis and is practiced in nature and in labs. Fertilization does not make a baby either, it helps create an embryo, not a baby. That takes nine months in a woman’s womb being nurtured and feed to survive to be born.
It is not only about biology, but about the Christian concept of marriage, then a family. Humans are far from perfect, and able to fulfill the ideal. However, there is never a place for a valid homosexual relationship in Christianity, and they don’t make a valid family as such. A step father is not a biological father, but he is a step-in for the father. IT is all about marriage as the foundation for families.
Ive chosen my own family over the years. Me and my Biological family have nothing at all in common. I dont owe my biological family my life neither I expect from them. I have people in my life that Ive chosen as my family.
I agree with Oliver.
James, so basically you’re saying that a rapist and his female victim have more claim to being a family, provided she doesn’t have an abortion, than loving adoptive parents who’ve been in a committed relationship for over a decade? And what about step parents? Not part of the family either James?
As it takes a man and a woman to make a baby, it takes a man and a woman to make a family. Anything less is fraudulent.
It takes a man and a woman to make a baby. They may not be in a relationship together, they may never have been in a relationship together. They may not have had sex with each other- if it’s an anonymous donor they may not have even met. Sometimes the woman who gives birth to the child will not be biologically related to it. Sometimes either the man or woman who make the baby will elect not to parent it, for their own reasons or those of someone else.
What makes a FAMILY is a group of people who have a sincere, enduring love and commitment to each other. They may not all be related to each other. In some cases there may be a child from a previous relationship, in some cases there may be no children at all. Sometimes the children in the relationship may have the same biological parents, sometimes they may share one biological parent, and sometimes they may not share biological parents at all. It may include extended family and friends, and sometimes, relatives, even close relatives, may not be a part of the family through their own choosing.
Love makes a family. This is as true for heterosexual families as it is for families where the parents are of the same gender.
Vic, with due respect a wish for gay equality does not negate biological facts. Sorry to disappoint you, but two men nor two woman have the biological capability to reproduce.
Vic, that reminds me of the old days watching Leave it to Beaver, and those “I think you and I need to talk” Birds and the bees scenarios. I actually beleived it once but Im a bit wiser now!! When a man and a woman get together its not always an instant sucess. I wish Fred Nile could be reading this!!!
Well it’s not how my two children were conceived but if going on with the thousand old myth makes you happy….
Vic, an egg is from a woman and sperm is from a man. So yes, it does in fact take a man and woman to make a baby.
The biggest piece of fiction of all is that it takes a man and a woman to make a baby. In fact it takes an egg to be fertilized by sperm to create a baby. You may as well stick with the old ‘when a mummy and a daddy love eachother tripe’. Anything else is nonsense we need to stop telling our children.