Queensland’s Civil Unions and the Christian Haters


The gay hating christians in Queensland are falling all over themselves to yell and scream about the proposal for civil unions legislation.

Before you can fart a fart those nasty types at the Australian Christian Lobby have decided that this is really a ploy to bring on full equality in marriage.  They’ve got their sticks out and they’re beating them hard.

I’m not familiar enough with the Queensland system to understand it, so some of the criticism is that there hasn’t been enough time for proper consultation (which I think is code for “we haven’t been able to get all the other haters sending in submissions yet).  Yet, reading through the comments at yesterdays hearings here, seems to indicate that there’s plenty of people stepping up to talk about it.

Let’s go with Wendy Francis, chief bigot of the ACL in Queensland:

I represent the Australian Christian Lobby here today and thank you for the opportunity to speak on this highly controversial Civil Partnerships Bill.

Glad we got that sorted.

First and foremost, the Civil Partnerships Bill mimics marriage in all but name.

So?  This is a state registration system.  Some other states, Victoria for example, already have them.  It’s clear it’s not marriage as it doesn’t come under the Federal Marriage Act.  But Francis sets the tone of her submission straight away, this is about marriage for the ACL, and therefore the gays must be stopped.  For the sake of the children.

Our objection is not merely religious but also for sociological reasons.

What rot, this is solely based on the notion that you think sex between people of the same gender is wrong.  That’s the basis of your argument, highlighted by the fact that your objection is ‘not merely’ religious.

ACL supports the view held by the majority of Australians that marriage is a unique relationship,

This is a civil union, not marriage.  Other surveys show a majority of Australians think everyone should be allowed to marry.

especially capable of creating and nurturing children, and in this way, underpinning the family, which is the basic building block of society.

This is a civil union, nothing to do with children.

This relationship is deserving of special protection precisely because it undergirds society itself and provides the optimal environment for children.

Relationships with children are important, hence the reason marriage equality is so important.

The reality is that while there are different forms of relationships, a number of which are practised in the wider community, only one – that between a man and a woman, is defined as being marriage and only this relationship is capable of producing children.

Bullshit, there’s kids in all sorts of relationship.  You mean that only a man and a woman can produce a baby, they don’t have to be married to do so.

States should only be regulating private human relationships where there is a matter of the wider benefit to society to encourage those relationships.

The state is trying regulate a private human relationship, to formally recognised them.  Society benefits because it allows public acknowledgement and provides evidence of your relationship status.  Why would you stand in the way of this?  What is wrong with two people wanting to formalise their relationship in an official way.  You’re not being asked to do it.  It has nothing to do with religion.

Have a read through the Brisbane Times summary of the public hearing.  The christians are up in arms and doing their best to stop this.

Here’s some of their words:

People have all sorts of rights… I can’t see that any right to redefine what marriage is. Marriage is not something that’s open to redefinition for the sake of some. What if people want to be in a threesome or a foursome and register all these relationships? – Very Reverend Dr Adrian Farelly from the John Paul II Centre for Family and Life, Archdiocese of Brisbane.


 There are serious concerns about where this law could lead – Reverend Moore


 Other nations have deviated from this bedrock definition (of marriage) and paid the price – Reverend from the Living House Family Church.


Certain things evolve in society, but marriage isn’t one of them. It’s an absolute wrong to kill or steal, marriage is a similar absolute – Pastor Jenny Spyve, from West End’s Rivers Community Church.


Quotes statistics from countries that have gay marriage or civil partnerships and says that the take-up among their gay population (in marriage/partnerships) is actually very low –  Reverend Allan Quak from the Northside Evangelical Church.


Throughout history, civilisations flourished when they valued monogamous, heterosexual relationships, and floundered when they failed to do so – Geoffrey Bullock from Family Voice Australia


Fears changing the definition of marriage could lead to incestuous or group marriage – Veronica Hayes from the National Marriage Coalition


There are biological arguments for opposing the bill – namely, that the purpose of marriage is to produce children, although not all marriages do produce children – Dr van Gend Family Council of Queensland

Can you imagine the hysterics that will be created when the Federal marriage act is changed?

This entry was posted in marriage.

Comments are closed.