The Rev Strikes Again.............. - TennisForum.com
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 64 (permalink) Old Aug 5th, 2004, 03:45 PM Thread Starter
BCP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: London
Posts: 1,971
                     
The Rev Strikes Again..............

Labor backs ban on gay marriage

By Meaghan Shaw
Canberra
August 5, 2004





Gay marriage will be made illegal in Australia before the federal election after Labor yesterday said that it would support the Government's proposed ban.

While Labor has stated previously that it is opposed to gay marriage, it had referred the original legislation to a Senate committee to examine the legal, constitutional and social impacts of the legislation.

Opposition attorney-general Nicola Roxon told the National Marriage Coalition forum in Canberra that Labor would now pass the bill.

"We understand how strongly many people feel about retaining and promoting the institution of marriage between men and women and as a bedrock institution for families," she said.

Prime Minister John Howard told the forum that he would reintroduce legislation within a fortnight, saying he wanted the issue dealt with before the election.

While gay marriage is not recognised in Australia, Mr Howard has expressed concern that the courts could adopt a more liberal interpretation. He said he wanted to enshrine in law the notion that marriage was a union between a man and a woman, to the exclusion of all others.

Advertisemt Advertisement
"It would be a great pity if this issue were left hanging in an election campaign," he said.

"In putting it into law in the next two weeks nobody can say it's being used as a wedge, nobody can say it's a diversion, everybody can say it's a united expression of the national parliament and therefore of the will of the Australian people."

Labor's move was condemned by gay groups and the minor parties.

Equal Rights Network spokesman Rodney Croome said that by breaking its promise to send the bill to be examined by a committee, "they have shown themselves to be completely untrustworthy on gay and lesbian rights".

Australian Marriage Equality spokesman Damien Meyer said Labor had abdicated any claim it may have had to being a party of social justice and inclusion after its "gutless" decision.

Australian Democrats justice spokesman Brian Greig said Labor had made a panicked decision to remove the issue from the election. He said both the Government and ALP were pandering to conservative religious organisations.

The National Marriage Coalition, formed last month, consists of the Australian Christian Lobby, Australian Family Association and the Fatherhood Foundation. It is supported by Catch the Fire Ministries, the evangelical church addressed by Treasurer Peter Costello in May.

More than 1000 people from all over the country attended yesterday's forum, arranged only three weeks ago to influence parliamentarians on the marriage legislation. They gave Mr Howard three standing ovations.

One speaker, Margaret Court, former tennis star and Christian minister, told The Age that homosexuality was a sin of the flesh, and the children of gay unions suffered shame and guilt. "I think they're thinking about a relationship for their own selfishness and not for the children."

Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson addressed the forum, which was attended by other MPs, including Kevin Andrews, Neil Andrews, Bronwyn Bishop, Ron Boswell and Guy Barnett.

Mr Howard is reintroducing the bill so that it deals solely with gay marriage, either in Australia or overseas. The original bill included a ban on gay couples adopting children overseas. Ms Roxon said Labor did not support this because adoption law was the responsibility of the states and territories.
BCP is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 64 (permalink) Old Aug 5th, 2004, 04:03 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 332
                     
Homophobic old witch,
if she attends the next wimbledon parade of champs she better watch out for some flyin´eggs!
jamesuk is offline  
post #3 of 64 (permalink) Old Aug 5th, 2004, 04:31 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,619
                     
I say, each to his own. While I don't agree with her, if Margaret is opposed to gay marriage etc then it is her right to debate that in public and discuss this in another forum.

To be quite honest it is only her tennis activities I have any interest in.
chris whiteside is offline  
 
post #4 of 64 (permalink) Old Aug 5th, 2004, 05:11 PM
Senior Member
 
alfajeffster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: United States of America
Posts: 9,216
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris whiteside
I say, each to his own. While I don't agree with her, if Margaret is opposed to gay marriage etc then it is her right to debate that in public and discuss this in another forum.

To be quite honest it is only her tennis activities I have any interest in.
(a round of applause for independent thinking!)

There is nothing more beautiful than Evonne Goolagong in full flight moving across a tennis court.
alfajeffster is offline  
post #5 of 64 (permalink) Old Aug 5th, 2004, 08:19 PM Thread Starter
BCP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: London
Posts: 1,971
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris whiteside
I say, each to his own. While I don't agree with her, if Margaret is opposed to gay marriage etc then it is her right to debate that in public and discuss this in another forum.

To be quite honest it is only her tennis activities I have any interest in.
Except that if she were to come out and say married black couples should not have the same rights as white married couples, would you feel the same?
BCP is offline  
post #6 of 64 (permalink) Old Aug 5th, 2004, 09:34 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: England
Posts: 1,667
                     
She can have her opinion about gay marriage, but saying something like being gay is sin of the flesh makes me lose my respect for her. Maybe it's taken out of context (I hope so), cause being Christian is about love and tolerance not about judging and critizising.
Robert1 is offline  
post #7 of 64 (permalink) Old Aug 6th, 2004, 04:07 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,567
                     
Thanks for posting this, BCP!

I've always wondered why the Reverend Court is so obsessed with this "sin of the flesh" that is homosexuality. This is not the first time she's mouthed off like this. Does she ever talk about anything else?
Zummi is offline  
post #8 of 64 (permalink) Old Aug 6th, 2004, 05:35 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: England
Posts: 1,667
                     
She probably lives in the middle age and wants to burn witches, too.
Robert1 is offline  
post #9 of 64 (permalink) Old Aug 6th, 2004, 06:01 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,619
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCP
Except that if she were to come out and say married black couples should not have the same rights as white married couples, would you feel the same?

Yes, because it would be treated with the contempt it deserved. Society will deal with Margaret on all issues in it's own way.

I suppose it would be wrong to say that I have no interest in a player's private life because if there is an article or news about them there's no doubt you read it in passing.

But I have no problem in separating her tennis and non-tennis life. Her utterances today in no way affect her past achievements nor the great player that she was which is really what this Forum is about.
chris whiteside is offline  
post #10 of 64 (permalink) Old Aug 6th, 2004, 06:43 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 25
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris whiteside
Yes, because it would be treated with the contempt it deserved. Society will deal with Margaret on all issues in it's own way.

I suppose it would be wrong to say that I have no interest in a player's private life because if there is an article or news about them there's no doubt you read it in passing.

But I have no problem in separating her tennis and non-tennis life. Her utterances today in no way affect her past achievements nor the great player that she was which is really what this Forum is about.

Bravo Chris!
Rors is offline  
post #11 of 64 (permalink) Old Aug 6th, 2004, 07:35 AM
Senior Member
 
irma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: the netherlands
Posts: 13,635
 
but I think this thread is relevant in this forum anyway

You have to respect and accept others opinions so that includes the people with strong religious dogma's or any other ideology etc. etc too
but what if those people don't do that themselves and start to insult and then come with "but I have a right to hate and disrespect .... because I like and respect ...... (talking about eufemistic behavior though).

there is my problem with it and even when it's not really a big deal it happens on this board too. where is the line when you can say I don't respect your opinion anymore because you don't respect others either?


Especially in religion dogma's I always have the feeling that when these people were at power they would try to get rid of everybody who doesn't agree with them, it's not even a feeling since history till this day proved it (that's not especially against Court, because obvious when church was at full power again she would be kicked out of her job in 1 second )

In the middle of the night
I go walking in my sleep
Through the desert of the truth
To the river so deep
We all end in the ocean
We all start in the streams
We're all carried along
By the river of dreams
In the middle of the night
irma is offline  
post #12 of 64 (permalink) Old Aug 6th, 2004, 08:18 AM
Senior Member
 
samn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: London
Posts: 2,960
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris whiteside
Yes, because it would be treated with the contempt it deserved. Society will deal with Margaret on all issues in it's own way.

I suppose it would be wrong to say that I have no interest in a player's private life because if there is an article or news about them there's no doubt you read it in passing.

But I have no problem in separating her tennis and non-tennis life. Her utterances today in no way affect her past achievements nor the great player that she was which is really what this Forum is about.
I agree with your sentiments, Chris. But: if we're free to discuss Evert's boy craziness, Shriver's baby, Jaeger's work with children, and Judy Nelson's clothing line, shouldn't Rev Mags' views also be fair game?

Best left-right combination by a German (and that includes Max Schmeling): Steffi Graf. All she did in 1987 was knock Navratilova out of #1 and try to knock Evert out of the sport. (Mike Lupica in "The Best and Worst of Tennis in 1987", World Tennis)

"A couple of years ago, we nicknamed Steffi Graf's forehand 'Jaws'. And that music would go perfectly when she starts running in to the net, swarming on that little ball." (JoAnne Russell, during the 1988 Wimbledon final between Graf and Navratilova)
samn is offline  
post #13 of 64 (permalink) Old Aug 6th, 2004, 08:47 AM Thread Starter
BCP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: London
Posts: 1,971
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris whiteside
Yes, because it would be treated with the contempt it deserved. Society will deal with Margaret on all issues in it's own way.

I suppose it would be wrong to say that I have no interest in a player's private life because if there is an article or news about them there's no doubt you read it in passing.

But I have no problem in separating her tennis and non-tennis life. Her utterances today in no way affect her past achievements nor the great player that she was which is really what this Forum is about.
Chris, I agree with you. I respect Magaret's record as a tennis player. I think if all the best ever players turned up to a fantasy tounrament at their best, Margret would be the favourite to win. I took your first statement as being that beacuse Margaret was a great tennis player, you really didn't care what she says, even though you don't agree with her.

I think that this is wrong. Margaret uses her fame as a tennis player as a platform to spread her narrow-minded bigotry. Do you think that she would have got a mention in the paper had she been a housewife? Do you think that they would have even invited her to speak?

Margaret has the right to her opinion, but I think that this is the forum for me to raise my objection.

Alfa, I have no problems with you personally, but I was surprised that as a gay man that you would still support Margaret and applaud her after her making comments like this.

For the record, I don't mind whether gay people marry or not. As a gay man, all I want is for homosexuals to have the same civil rights in partnerships as heterosexuals.............
BCP is offline  
post #14 of 64 (permalink) Old Aug 6th, 2004, 08:50 AM
Senior Member
 
samn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: London
Posts: 2,960
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCP

For the record, I don't mind whether gay people marry or not. As a gay man, all I want is for homosexuals to have the same civil rights in partnerships as heterosexuals.............
I'm waiting for a post from Pamela Shriver to lighten the mood by stating that gay people should also have the right to marry aging, almost senile James Bonds (with one foot in the grave) if they wish to do so...

Best left-right combination by a German (and that includes Max Schmeling): Steffi Graf. All she did in 1987 was knock Navratilova out of #1 and try to knock Evert out of the sport. (Mike Lupica in "The Best and Worst of Tennis in 1987", World Tennis)

"A couple of years ago, we nicknamed Steffi Graf's forehand 'Jaws'. And that music would go perfectly when she starts running in to the net, swarming on that little ball." (JoAnne Russell, during the 1988 Wimbledon final between Graf and Navratilova)
samn is offline  
post #15 of 64 (permalink) Old Aug 6th, 2004, 09:30 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 101
                     
It's more important to be a good person than a good tennis player. Let's see....you've got Andrea Jaeger, who didn't win any grand slam titles, but has had such a positive impact on so many lives from her work with children with cancer. Then you've got Margaret Court who has the grand slam titles, but she's using her energy to spread hate, prejudice, and discrimination. Enough said.
JorgeHoff is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome