The end of the same sex marriage debate

April 18th, 2013 at 3:00 pm by David Farrar

Well, the debate finished at 9.30 pm last night, but the celebrations carried on much longer. I got home at 4 am and finished the night with a quarter pounder at McDonalds – my first one in around a year and a half! It was badly needed to soak up the alcohol – and oh yeah it tasted great! Fuck, I’ve missed them :-)

It is hard to put into words how much joy and happiness there was last night. Many issues just impact people indirectly or abstractly, but this was an issue which had massive importance to many many individual New Zealanders. You can’t really understand the significance of this law change to those affected, unless you are in their shoes.  I was privileged enough to have a huge number of people come up to me last night and share their stories and emotions about what this means to them. It often goes to the core of self-worth, aspirations for a happy future etc. Thank you to everyone who shared with me – it was also great to meet so many previously unknown readers. Some of the exchanges were surreal – such as the young woman at McDonalds who just patted me on the head as she walked past our table and said “marriage equality rocks”. No idea who she was.

Last night reinforced for me my total lack of doubt that this law change was a good thing to do. On most issues, I have some doubts. I think charter schools should provide some better educational outcomes for some students – but I am of course not certain. Likewise I think having private shareholdings in SOEs will be better for the NZ economy – but it is not guaranteed. Almost all issues have trade-offs.

People go into politics with a genuine desire to make their country a better place. I’ve spent a fair amount of time thinking about what is the meaning of life etc. We only get to have 80 – 100 years. Over the course of history all but a few individuals are pretty insignificant So what should life be about? Is existence a bit pointless? In the end my conclusions are that our aim should be to make ourselves happy, and make other people happy. Life is here to be enjoyed.

I accept some people are unhappy at a conceptual level that gay couples will be able to marry. But for me that unhappiness is absolutely dwarfed by the immense joy this law change brings to gay and lesbian (etc) New Zealanders. I saw it last night in the gallery at Parliament, in the Grand Hall afterwards, down at S&M and Ivys on Cuba Street. They were not celebrating it as a political victory, but a personal one. It wasn’t like the enjoyment you get when the political party you favour wins an election. It was that personal sense of gaining of rights and equality – the symbolism and hope that they as an individual could one day get married. While the law change was a political act, don’t think that the motivations of those in favour were political – it was for many very personal.

For me personally, it has no effect. I am heterosexual. But I’m glad I have a well developed enough empathy that just seeing and sharing other people’s happiness made last night very special to me. As I said, you get involved in politics to try and make NZ a place where more people have happy lives.

From 1840 to 1867, homosexual activity in NZ wasn’t just illegal but was punishable by death. 145 years later, same sex couples can marry. We have come a very long way as a country.

Now the campaign is over, I also want to touch on the political side of the issue. They say that success has many fathers and failure is an orphan. Well that is true but in terms of this issue there are in fact many people who played an important role, and I want to touch on some of them.

First and foremost are Louisa Wall and Kevin Hague. They ran an inclusive positive campaign that was focused on the issue, and left party politics to one side. It can be a bit strange at first working with people from parties you spend half you time criticising, but they were nothing but warm, focused and professional. I regard them both as very good people, and the bill would not have passed with the support it had, without their leadership roles. I’ve seen many a good issue fail, because the political management of the campaign was sub-standard. Louisa and Kevin made a great team and their quiet calm persuasive styles convinced a number of MPs to support the bill on its merits.

On National’s side, many MPs made significant contributions. Hutch, Auckie and Maurice provided the standout speeches for each reading. PM John Key’s support was of incalculable value. The tone of the debate and the margin would have been very different without his support (even though I thinki it would have still passed). I must make special mention of three National MPs who contributed so much behind the scenes – Tau, Jami-Lee and Nikki. The three of them put in a huge amount of work to make sure the bill passed last night. I won’t get into the details of all the issues around votes, proxies, amendments, calls, scheduling and the like.

Also on the National side, two non MPs deserve special mention. Megan Campbell and Shaun Wallis showed you do not have to be an MP to make a positive and significant impact on politics. Megan’s contribution was immense – from lobbying MPs, to speech notes, to fact sheets, rebuttal points, procedural advice and much more. She must be the most effective lobbyist around at the moment – and she was working for free!

Shaun Wallis, and many other Young Nats, also contributed a great deal. If you’re a young person and wondering if young people can have an impact. Well consider that Young Nats have had a significant role in getting the VSM law passed, stopping the alcohol purchase age increasing to 20, and helping with the numbers on this law. When I was a Young Nat I don’t think Shane Frith and I achieved anything much beyond annoying Jim Bolger on a regular basis :-)

Also kudos to all the youth wings who took part in the joint press statement for first reading and the joint press conference for second reading. The unity of youth on the issue was very powerful, and had great resonance with the media and MPs.

Andrew Burns did an amazing job with social media on the campaign. I was staggered by the reach of the campaign’s congratulatory message on Facebook. Within an hour of the vote, I think the message had reached almost half a million people and been shared by over 5,000 to all their networks.

Also Conrad Reyners had a difficult job, which he did so well. In a campaign the challenge isn’t just to get your supporters to do things – often it is to also stop them from doing things. A few overly enthusiastic supporters who go over the top with their rhetoric can damage your own side significantly (as opponents found out). Conrad and the wider campaign team ran a very disciplined, positive on message campaign.

Amusing end to the night was in McDonalds with Conrad close to 4 am, when we realised it was all over, and he said that he can now go back to hating me as fascist scum, and vice-versa him as a pinko commie :-)

Life now goes back to normal, and life goes on for the country also – except in four months time expect an increase in the number of couples getting married in New Zealand!

Tags: ,

144 Responses to “The end of the same sex marriage debate”

  1. xy (152 comments) says:

    Good work. I disagree with a whole lot of your posts and the raging commentors thereon, but I’m really happy with all your work on this. High five.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 20 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Manolo (13,375 comments) says:

    Well, the debate finished at 9.30 pm last night, but the celebrations carried on much longer. I got home at 4 am …

    I read that in utter disbelief. It shows DPF’s dedication to this critical and extremely important cause.

    [DPF: The time I got home is also a reflection of the fact people brought me drinks all night!]

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. kowtow (7,634 comments) says:

    Progressive agenda ,using a formerly conservative medium the National Party ,likewise Rainbow agenda using the former workers’ party Labour.

    I see nothing to celebrate .What I see is agressive minority agenda ,betrayal of old principles and the collapse of traditional values ,be they workers’ or conservative.

    But well done you’ve run a successful campaign and we the sheeple have been rolled right over or in this particular case taken it right up the arse.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 27 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. mandk (821 comments) says:

    Life now goes back to normal.
    Agreed – the country continues its slide into the cesspit of relativism.
    (And the Conservatives and NZ First will gain support from disllusioned ex-Nats)

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 24 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Zapper (926 comments) says:

    I got home at 11am the morning after the world cup final – I suspect more than 22% of New Zealanders were also celebrating that night.

    Fair play heading to the gym the next morning, I can never manage that after a bender like that.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Manolo (13,375 comments) says:

    Progressive agenda, using a formerly conservative medium the National Party…

    A very accurate description of Labour’s lite sorry state of affairs.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. laworder (269 comments) says:

    Well I’m glad its over. I am mildly in favour, but truly sick of the debate, which I have not bothered entering into as I regarded it as 1) inevitable and 2) not all that important in the greater scheme of things

    Now I hope we can get on with dealing with some of the real life issues that face NZ that have real consequences (in some cases life/death consequences) for all NZer’s regardless of orientation

    Regards
    Peter J
    see http://www.sensiblesentencing.org.nz

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. BlairM (2,287 comments) says:

    I am so embarrassed that people think this is so important and such an amazing accomplishment. I’m sad that the government now lies about the true nature of marriage. But it really is cringeworthy that people think they need the government’s permission to do things, especially to formalise a relationship with a companion.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 21 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Manolo (13,375 comments) says:

    Celebrating the financial gains already: http://news.msn.co.nz/nationalnews/8644554/expats-return-home-for-gay-weddiing

    Let’s rejoice.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Chuck Bird (4,682 comments) says:

    Life now goes back to normal, and life goes on for the country also –except in four months time – expect an increase in the number of couples getting married in New Zealand!.

    In four years time you will also see more sexual confused and abused adolescents due to the increased teaching of this sort of politically correct garbage in our schools.

    If it was not for the fact that so many people were not scared of the label homophobe that school teacher up north would not have had so many victims. Would people have keep quite if a male teacher had adolescent girls sleeping over – not bloody likely?

    To some people libertarianism is very much like a fundamentalist religion.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 23 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. scrubone (3,048 comments) says:

    First and foremost are Louisa Wall and Kevin Hague. They ran an inclusive positive campaign that was focused on the issue, and left party politics to one side.

    Hm, are you sure marriage the only term redefined last night?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Andrei (2,504 comments) says:

    Ha – and what’s gonna happen when they find that having stormed the citadel of marriage they find that they have gained nothing, not a thing that they didn’t have before? If they valued marriage for what it really is they probably wouldn’t want it

    It’s the theatre of the absurd

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. RRM (9,467 comments) says:

    You’ve done something good then DPF – thank you!

    In know the likelihood of my girl or my little boy growing up gay is very small – less than 3% I believe.

    But it is wonderful to think that if either of them do find themselves on that path, the mechanisms of the state in their country will not afford them any less freedoms or rights than what my wife and I enjoy. They know I’ll always love them no matter what, but it is good that their country has now removed the last vestige of institutional discrimination.

    All future generations will have to worry about is the private opinions of a few confused, hate-filled individuals… but as most of them seem to spend all of their time on here I’m sure they’ll be fine.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 28 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Neil (556 comments) says:

    DPF what was the need to use the expletive f… when there other words more socially acceptable. That does nothing to your person. Do you have trouble expressing yourself ! Try that in front of a member of the police etc.
    I support the Bill but it is not an important matter in relation to New Zealand. To be in the trendy column was the place to be for so called paragons of importance.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. BeaB (2,058 comments) says:

    I’m now looking forward to the first divorce and disputes over custody and child support.
    It was much easier when you could just walk away.
    And I hope kids have the right to know, whatever their birth certificates say,who their actual parents are because that’s one thing the law can’t yet change.
    That said, I am glad the law has changed, people who want their big day can have it and we’ll be spared the endless, hectoring gay propaganda.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Chuck Bird (4,682 comments) says:

    If adultery was still grounds for divorce how would they define it?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    Wow it is hard to understand your enthusiasm David but then you do live in Wgtn and I suppose this was popular there. Wgtn is like a separate country when it comes to issues like this. You mentioned someone noted down who voted for homosexual law reform..All over the south tonight , people are noting who voted for this bill. Their names will be sounded out loud and clear prior to the next election.
    As for the speeches..I haven’t heard them but can’t imagine Maurice Williamson’s was any great cop..At the end of yesterday’s GD , Calendar girl praised Winston’s speech , saying that he championed democracy. The passing of this bill has nothing to do with democracy. About 36 who voted for it were list MPs . They have no mandate..they were never elected by anyone.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. wreck1080 (3,732 comments) says:

    Now lets move on to polygamy and allowing large groups of people to marry.

    Really, marriage has no meaning anyway. Anyone should be allowed to marry anyone. To not allow it is to be a bigot.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. The Scorned (719 comments) says:

    Oh piss off and burn a witch or something you Bible buggered, dark aged bigots……and grow up in to the bargin.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 25 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. mandk (821 comments) says:

    The Scorned – nice to hear the voice of reason

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Mr Elbow (30 comments) says:

    The issue is over for most, but Chuck’s issues regarding his own confused sexuality will continue to linger.

    (How else can one explain his fascination with the activities of gay people?)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Chuck Bird (4,682 comments) says:

    @The Scoured

    Have you rung up your boyfriend and told him you wish he was here?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Chuck Bird (4,682 comments) says:

    @Mr Elbow

    Interesting pseudonym, do you get RSI?

    The issue will be remembered next election.

    The only ones who are confused are those who confuse a muck hole with a fuck hole.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Nothing changes for homosexuals. Nothing. They’re still homosexuals. They still have the same homosexual relationships: mutual stimulation and nothing.

    What has changed is common law marriage has become detached from legal marriage, the bit of paper. Nothing can change common law marriage, a man taking a wife.

    People laugh when I talk about a man taking a wife. They don’t understand women. The reality is, women, for all their new found freedoms, still look for a man who will look after them. Be a man.

    My problem is I don’t believe this campaign has been about marriage. The purpose was to gain respectability. The queers want the name, or the right to it. It’s been a movement, right around the Western World. A stampede.

    Mr Farrar, I hope you keep track of the numbers getting married. Bet you it’ll be entirely inconsequential after the initial bursting into song and dance. The bloom will wilt.

    I don’t think the oldies feel cheated because they are past it, I think they feel cheated because they are wise, know something about life.

    We’ll see if Maurice Williamson’s boisterous support resonates in the ballot box. I would imagine his gratuitous insults to the ignorant “bigots” and “homophobes” in his electorate might turn to sticks and stones. That is, he might take a beating.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Fletch (6,026 comments) says:

    Congrats DPF – Helen would be proud.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Manolo (13,375 comments) says:

    Same party members maybe? :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    La-la-la, David Pee Farrar
    Playing very much short of par
    This time he has gone far too far
    His words of advice to us do just jar
    So after considering his night in the bar
    We just say to him: nah-nah-nah.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    The tub thumping bronze age superstitious bigots obviously have fuck all else to do this year.

    Go and do some charity work if you want to make the world a better place.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    Aw, give me more thumbs down bigots.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Steve Wrathall (243 comments) says:

    “From 1840 to 1867, homosexual activity in NZ wasn’t just illegal but was punishable by death.” And still is in Mauritania, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Iran http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/07/02/homosexuality_is_still_punishable_by_death_in_five_states
    Hmmmm. Anyone spot any common factor in those 5 countries?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    The biological optimum is a man and woman raising their biologcial offspring.

    Instead of finding ways to promote this optimum for the benefit of the vast majority of current and future NZers, a minority being our self-righteous liberals have devalued marriage in yet another step towards making it an undifferentiated, irrelevant institution.

    It is a sad say for New Zealand.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    Run by bronze age religious bigots?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    expat, cowpat, just what’s in a name?
    “Gay” then “hero”, what is your game?
    To put our “marriage” is in the flame?
    It will make you queers no less lame
    So why not take a word like “whiny”
    And turn it into something shiny?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    expat – I usually find your comments valuable and reasoned… except when responding to Christians on any topic. Why? Serious question. I don’t understand.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    Because of the enthusiastic hatred towards and half assed reasoning against homos and the simplistic belief that christian superstitions somehow trump a modern democracy.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    So, because you interpret the words of some to be ‘enthusiastic hatred’, ‘simplistic’ and ‘anti-democratic’ … in your mind this legitimises ad hominem’s directed at any Christian on any topic? Isn’t this the very behaviour you condemn?

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. RRM (9,467 comments) says:

    Fear not!

    If you don’t like gay marriage, straight marriage is still available!

    (The gays don’t want to suppress your freedom, that’s something uniquely you lot are into!)

    As always, natural reproduction can still be done without any bullshit piece of paper from any imaginary creator spirit whatsoever!

    Good night, and happy hating everyone! Remember, god hates fags, and god hates fag enablers!

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    Its not an interpretation.Society has moved on from bronze aged superstitions.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Chuck Bird (4,682 comments) says:

    If you don’t like gay marriage, straight marriage is still available!

    Boring, boring, boring

    Can you not think of something original paedophile enabler?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Fletch (6,026 comments) says:

    ps, this is not the “end of the debate”.

    Now we will see REAL discrimination in the coming months against parents who disagree with the gender equality lessons their children are being taught in school, the books in their libraries, the florist and cake makers who won’t supply a gay wedding, the church who won’t let their hall be used for a reception. etc etc. It’s all happening overseas.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    expat – actually it is an interpretation.

    You and I both evaluate what we read using our personal value systems, these being complex combinations of life experience, upbringing, faiths of various sorts.

    I’m simply challenging your propensity to dismiss out-of-hand anything said by a commenter known to be Christian.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. mandk (821 comments) says:

    Expat,
    You should get together with The Scorned.
    It would be a perfect mock-marriage!

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Reid (15,954 comments) says:

    Because of the enthusiastic hatred towards and half assed reasoning against homos and the simplistic belief that christian superstitions somehow trump a modern democracy.

    There is no hatred against anyone because “homos” already had all the rights, der, and that’s why there was no discrimination. Der.

    And people who objected did so on principled grounds that are real, provable and actual based on history and evidence that is there and could be easily discussed. In terms of for example, does it (“x”) exist? Yes, there it is, proved by events A, B, and C. But no.

    Instead it was all, at the end of the day, emotional almost hysterical plaintive wails about all this discwimination, that wasn’t there.

    And you mentals give away the institution of marriage for that? The institution that is the foundation of civilisation? Duh.

    This is why gay marriage is deleterious to the current arrangements.

    And you just gave it away, just because some clever people put together a meme and you fell for it. Hook, line and sinker. And you do it cheering. If I had to pick between living amongst you guys who did that, or a society full of braying fools where explosives were sold in dairies just like lollies, I’d chose the latter. It’s that bad.

    Thanks.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    Focus on the big things fletch, like whether god made the world in 7 days or if it is carried by a big space turtle.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. MrTips (144 comments) says:

    And still no word from the man who started all this – Labour Party GS, Tim Barnett.

    Come on, you don’t seriously think Louisa Wall or Kevin Hague had much to do with starting this firestorm do you?
    I mean, they don’t even WANT to get married………

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    Chuck Bird (3,308) Says:
    April 18th, 2013 at 6:13 pm
    If you don’t like gay marriage, straight marriage is still available!

    Boring, boring, boring

    Can you not think of something original paedophile enabler?

    Is that you Fred Phelps :) http://www.godhatesfags.com/

    Compendium of Bible Truth on Fags (first published in 1991)

    Sodomites are wicked & sinners before the Lord exceedingly (Gen.13:13), are violent & doom nations (Gen. 19:1-25; Jgs. 19), are abominable to God (Lev. 18:22), are worthy of death for their vile sex practices (Lev. 20:13; Rom. 1:32), are called dogs as filthy, impudent & libidinous (Deut. 23:17,18; Mat. 7:6;Phil. 3:2), produce in society mass intoxication from their wine made from grapes of gall from the vine of Sodom & fields of Gomorrah, poisoning society’s mores with the poison of dragons & the cruel venom of asps (Deut. 32:32,33), show their sin & shame on their countenance (Isa. 3:9), are shameless & unable to blush (Jer. 6:15), workers of iniquity (Psa. 5:5), liars & murderers (Jn. 8:44), filthy & lawless (2 Pet. 2:7,8), natural brute beasts (2 Pet. 2:12), are likened unto dogs eating their own vomit, sows wallowing in their own feces (2 Pet. 2:22), will proliferate at the end of the world bringing final judgment on mankind (Lk. 17:28-30), have been finally given up by God to uncleanness to dishonor their own bodies, to vile affections, & to a reprobate mind such that they cannot think straight about anything (Rom. 1:23-28); and, unable to blush, be ashamed, or repent (Jer. 6:15), they have no hope of Heaven (Rev. 22:15). “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” Heb. 10:31.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Griff (6,803 comments) says:

    You dont find the story of the invisible sky pixie and the ritual imbibing of his son the Jesus zombies blood and flesh so you can life forever particularly rational then ex pat.
    Strange that :lol:

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Nostalgia-NZ (4,913 comments) says:

    Easy to tell by many of the comments and much of the countrywide debate this legislation hasn’t and won’t for a long time have a soft landing. DPF has waxed lyrical about the good of all but hasn’t commented that many object to the law for personal reasons and others view it as not having the mandate of the electorate. In some ways there seems a sense for some that those objections dispersed with the vote last night, I guess some might even feel euphoric about it, however it doesn’t seem that the two sides to the debate will now suddenly merge, one being more accepting of the other – that seem’s to be the false dawn.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    I prefer Hans Christian Anderson for my fairy tales

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Dazzaman (1,123 comments) says:

    The post has an elated triumphant ring to it…..strange, most are totally blase about the issue whilst another large group, like myself feel bad for the country as a whole knowing what a crock of shit it all is. Rugby World Cup final-like it isn’t….

    Us provincials, if we have any thoughts about it at all, are sneeringly dismissive of homo’s at the best of times….even more so today.

    It’s certainly a Macca’s burger celebration, light weight, teenage dross….and this is meant to be a serious blog?

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    God Hates New Zealand

    (New Zealand’s Filthy Manner of Life)

    Fags. Same sex civil unions provide virtually all the same benefits as marriage and are different only in name. Marriages of same sex couples married in other countries are recognized by New Zealand. 40% of the population support fag marriage.

    New Zealand has hosted fag pride parades since 1970. The parade in Auckland was called the “Hero parade” which is appropriate because their heroes are nothing but pansies! Auckland was also voted the “15th Gayest City in the World.” Elaborate dyke “balls” are regularly held in the three biggest cities in the nation: Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch (what a misnamed city!)

    http://www.godhatestheworld.com/newzealand/filthymanneroflife.html

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    God will burn you for your hate bigots, remember that.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    expat. The Christian God will not. The only honest christian is Fred Phelps. He backs up every single thing he says with scripture. That is why Christians hate him. Crazy old Fred shows the world what that bronze age cult book really says. He does not lie or make any excuses, he follows God perfect word. He has forgotten more scripture than most Christians will ever learn.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    http://www.mymarriagepledge.org.nz/

    Chuck, your link above , I don’t need people like you to protect my marriage, I’ve managed to last over two decades without having any busy body bastards sticking their nose into my marriage.

    My marriage is between two people, as are all marriages, the only people who have a say in my marriage are me and my wife. I am presuming you are well-intentioned but even the well-intentioned need to be told to fuck off, mind your own business and get on with your life.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Griff (6,803 comments) says:

    At the 1999 general election, Beyer was selected as the Labour Party’s candidate for the Wairarapa electorate. She surprised the political commentators to win the typically right-leaning electorate with a 3,033-vote majority over National’s Paul Henry and become the world’s first transsexual MP.

    The expansion of freedom from intolerance is not only from our metropolitan centers Your “provincials” are not as backward as you claim.

    Those apposed can not see that this insignificant change opens the institution of marriage to wider enjoyment.

    This change must strengthen the vows not debase them. The most damage to successful marriages in this delightful story is the institutions attack by those opposed stating continuously that marriage is only about sex and kids.

    To have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love ,to cherish*, till death us do part,

    *and to obey deleted : Another battle won against stupid religious based or enabled prejudice.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Lucia Maria (2,208 comments) says:

    Paul, marriages are public institutions. Otherwise the government wouldn’t be interesting in regulating them.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. nasska (10,680 comments) says:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/rkf0unp3l1km8sv/chart.jpg

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Paul, marriages are public institutions

    Utter horse shit.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. big bruv (13,311 comments) says:

    I do so enjoy a win over the religious fundies and bigots.

    Did anybody else notice that the sun came up this morning?

    The next move must be to pass a law making it illegal for religions of any type to deny same sex couples the right to marry.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 18 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Fletch (6,026 comments) says:

    I do so enjoy a win over the religious fundies and bigots.

    Nobody won. We ALL lost last night.
    Just that some cannot see it yet.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Longknives (4,464 comments) says:

    Tears of joy on the news, Parliament holding hands and singing ‘Maori’ love songs, one elated man screaming “This is the greatest day in New Zealand History”, Louisa Wall smiling smugly (knowing she has New Zealander of the year awards sewn up)
    Someone get me a fucking puke bucket.

    And when did New Zealand become ‘Aoteroa’? Has the name change been made official already? (Something else they neglected to consult the people on…)

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Nostalgia-NZ (4,913 comments) says:

    I admire Griffs extrapolation that the rural sets vote for Georgina Byers back in the day was somehow a portent to their acceptance of gay marriage. While of course who could deny big bruv’s willingness to also be ‘big sis,’ the sun certainly came up after all.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Shunda barunda (2,965 comments) says:

    Isn’t it funny that the re-definers are acting as if their ‘enemy’ is dead!

    We are all still sitting here along with the 78% of NZers appalled at your conduct, and we are still allowed to vote (at the moment any way).

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. the conservative (58 comments) says:

    This is a long way from over. It’s only the beginning; you simply cannot award equality to one group by imposing inequality on another; it doesn’t work that way. This fascist approach to running a country is ultimately going to lead to violence; it’s inevitable. The select committee process has been a joke and polls clearly show the majority don’t want this nonsense. Even this simple one of 17,000 last night on Campbell Live showed 78% oppose gay marriage. Wake up, folks, you’ve been sucked in.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jQL9iho5hm4

    It’s amazing how people lined up for the final vote at parliament; you don’t see that ever. Yet, Key and his leftist friends didn’t see any reason for a referendum. Bye bye John Key

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. graham (2,215 comments) says:

    big bruv at 7:06 pm, as gracious as ever.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Nostalgia-NZ (4,913 comments) says:

    Alison Mau celebrating how at the bar where she was drinking they ‘turned down’ the sound when Winston Peters and others spoke, apparently missed the point that a good part of the population see the legislation as ‘turning down’ the sound on democracy. While the MP for Pakuranga saw his speech as an opportunity to mock the views of a large proportion of his own electorate. If this was a display representative of the will of the people I guess I missed it.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. graham (2,215 comments) says:

    And again, whether you support or oppose this bill, does anybody REALLY think this sets the scene for Louisa Wall to be the next Prime Minister?

    The interviewer at Radio Live does.

    http://www.radiolive.co.nz/Louisa-Wall-contemplates-her-next-move-after-successful-gay-marriage-bill/tabid/506/articleID/34799/Default.aspx

    By the way, it’s not the end of the debate. Oh no. Louisa now feels the need to take the fight for marriage equality to the Pacific Islands and to Australia (that’s around the 1 minute 45 mark in the audio).

    You go, girl. Go ahead and tell others how to run their countries, because you know what’s best for them. We don’t want anybody here telling gays and lesbians they can’t marry, because it isn’t right to tell others what they can and can’t do, but apparently it’s fine to tell other countries what they need to do. Because we’re so enlightened.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Shunda barunda (2,965 comments) says:

    . Many issues just impact people indirectly or abstractly, but this was an issue which had massive importance to many many individual New Zealanders. You can’t really understand the significance of this law change to those affected, unless you are in their shoes.

    This leaves me wondering just how many gay people there are in NZ, I had no idea of the significance.
    No one in my area was celebrating in the streets like it was VE day, and there is no evidence of confetti in the gutters this morning.

    I thought we were talking about 2% of the population identifying as gay, so with that number (unless they exceed the ratio of hetero marriage) you might be looking at this bill directly affecting about 0.2 percent of the population.

    Or is it just possible that the Wellington elite think their issues are OUR issues?

    Hmmm, so perplexing.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Pete George (22,851 comments) says:

    <i<"you simply cannot award equality to one group by imposing inequality on another; it doesn’t work that way."

    It certainly doesn’t work the way that was written, inequality is not being imposed on anyone.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. Reid (15,954 comments) says:

    It certainly doesn’t work the way that was written, inequality is not being imposed on anyone.

    It was never being imposed Pete.

    That’s the point.

    The fact that you and a few million other idiots failed to see that is not a victory, it’s a defeat.

    Which your grandchildren’s children won’t thank our generation for.

    That’s what you’ve done Pete.

    Thanks.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Nostalgia-NZ (4,913 comments) says:

    The right to have one’s vote counted Pete George. That’s how it usually works in a democracy, particularly on controversial issues.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. nasska (10,680 comments) says:

    Like Shunda I’ve seen little evidence of street celebrations although I suspect the fact that I live 30Km out of town may have something to do with it.

    But for all the whinging & prophesies of doom aired on these forums over recent days we would have expected a little more jubilation & celebration from the newly liberated. Perhaps there never were many people likely to be affected by the legislation & the few sad old queers fronting the press & TV are all the Godfreaks got their underwear in knots for.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Griff (6,803 comments) says:

    Engagement notices will be interesting for the next few weeks.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. Nostalgia-NZ (4,913 comments) says:

    Bill and Ben the flowerpot men?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. nasska (10,680 comments) says:

    The reports of people being kidnapped off the street & forced at gunpoint into arranged marriages will be worth reading too Griff. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. Shunda barunda (2,965 comments) says:

    So most people now seem comfortable with the ‘social capital’ aspect as the primary motivation for redefinition “what this means for gays” etc instead of an actual real demand for gay marriage.

    So the next question is, how do you think they are now going to spend this social capital? Several MPs involved in this have mentioned (more than once) a desire to facilitate ‘coming out’ and gender specific programs that target youth.
    Some of these individuals also believe that up to 15% of the population are actually gay and just need a bit of a push.

    If they are wrong, what do you think the damage could be to kids with identity issues?

    This is just the beginning all right.

    Don’t bet on youth suicide rates going down.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. Griff (6,803 comments) says:

    Plenty of shit on the sheets in the fundie households nasska

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. KiwiGreg (3,177 comments) says:

    This blog post was badly mistitled.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. nasska (10,680 comments) says:

    Always kept well undercover Griff….at least until the trial. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Shunda barunda (2,965 comments) says:

    “you’re not better than us” they screamed, all the while ignoring the real source of ill feeling was much closer to home.

    It’s easy to blame others than to go through a ‘dark night of the soul’ experience. Unfortunately, that ‘night’ eventually approaches regardless.

    This legislation could actually harm gay people a great deal…. screaming “we’re no different” is great for a temporary insecurity fix, but it’s yourself you still have to convince.

    What if it turns out that gay people are quite a bit different? all of a sudden support where it’s needed isn’t there due to a dominant ideological perspective encompassing society.

    That’s the problem with removing diversity, sometimes it actually harms minorities more than anyone.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. lilman (892 comments) says:

    I really dont care if Homosexuals want to live together or get married,it simply is none of my business.

    But I wont ever support this mess simply because it should have gone to a binding referendum.No law that changes the very fabric of New Zealand lifestyle and culture should ever be decided by MPs in Wellington.They have no mandate ,a vast number of which are List MPs.
    I would vote for the Homosexual Marriage,if it was put before the people, but the citizens of New Zealand were not given that right.

    So I WILL NEVER ACCEPT THIS FARCE.

    And that is wrong.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. SPC (5,392 comments) says:

    shunda, want to organise a petition for a referendum on same sex marriages?

    Ask Colin and Winston to back up their words and support you.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. SPC (5,392 comments) says:

    Of all those bleating that there should be a referendum, is anyone going to even bother to organise a petition?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. SPC (5,392 comments) says:

    If not stop saying there should have been one, it’s in your power to organise a referendum.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. SPC (5,392 comments) says:

    I guess someone cannot handle the truth.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    Shunda your are an idiot.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    Lilman, I would vote for christian norms on society if there was a referendum…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    “So I WILL NEVER ACCEPT THIS FARCE.”

    lilman, good on you. Stick to your beliefs. That is the great thing about this law change, it stops one group imposing their views on another.

    It does not require your acceptance. It is done. Its over.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. Mark (1,363 comments) says:

    Gay adoption has been passed without so much as a debate on the issue but then that is democracy at work

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. Shunda barunda (2,965 comments) says:

    Gay adoption has been passed without so much as a debate on the issue but then that is democracy at work

    But Mark! the government just said they’re the same! the law will make that all ok now, there is no need for debate! it’s all solved.
    Just like Sue Bradford, remember? how she ended all child abuse in NZ by changing the law?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. Shunda barunda (2,965 comments) says:

    Shunda your are an idiot.

    Charming.

    I guess that is your companion argument to the marriage debate which consisted of…..”shut up”, and when strung together:(which you haven’t managed to do yet) “shut up your (sic) an idiot.”

    You are truly an intellectual powerhouse :D

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    I will never take it up the arse
    No matter what silly laws that do pass
    For I do love the girls far too much
    Especially for what’s in their crutch
    This may seem far too earthy
    For a man who’s no longer thirty
    But they say you feel only just as old
    As the woman that you have just rolled.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. Chinarugby (84 comments) says:

    Hey Chucky Bird – you overlooked to remind us allonce again – who you gonna vote for!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    After mocking a priest about celibacy and a constituent who said he would go to Hell, Maurice Williamson claimed to have a degree in physics.

    Williamson graduated in computer science. I think our boy-stir-us MP got carried away on the night. Will he be carried away at the next election?

    It does not seem so terribly wise
    If the Pakuranga electorate is your prize
    For you to concerned constituents mock
    Or those not allowed to amuse their cock
    You falsely claimed you have a physics degree
    You’re no better than those who only use it to pee.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. Psycho Milt (2,267 comments) says:

    Now we will see REAL discrimination in the coming months against parents who disagree with the gender equality lessons their children are being taught in school…

    I should fucking hope so. The kind of scum who have a problem with gender equality could do with being on the receiving end of some unpleasantness. And what kind of fucked-up school would be promoting gender inequality anyway?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. Psycho Milt (2,267 comments) says:

    If they are wrong, what do you think the damage could be to kids with identity issues?

    Worst-case scenario: way, way less damage than that done by the approach taken for hundreds of years up to 1986, which was to declare you a criminal abomination if you didn’t fit the regular mould, and treat beatings or murder as acceptable forms of interaction with homosexuals. As I recall, Christians were largely in favour of continuing with the “criminal abomination” approach back in 1986, so no need for concern trolling.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. berend (1,634 comments) says:

    DPF: From 1840 to 1867, homosexual activity in NZ wasn’t just illegal but was punishable by death. 145 years later, same sex couples can marry. We have come a very long way as a country.

    For those we skipped history classes. We haven’t come a long way, but backtracked a long way. Homosexuality wasn’t illegal in Greek and Roman times. Neither were abortion, suicide or euthanasia.

    It was Christianity that changed all this. No wonder that when Christianity is in retreat, the nation goes completely back again where it came from.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. berend (1,634 comments) says:

    Fletch: Now we will see REAL discrimination in the coming months against parents who disagree with the gender equality lessons their children are being taught in school

    Parents who still send their kids to public schools deserve it. Their kids were already exposed to anything goes and morality is irrelevant sex lessons, so would this really matter to them? Don’t think so.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. RRM (9,467 comments) says:

    Welcome to day two of gay marriage, fundies! :-)

    Are any of you starting to notice a few things are changing as the re-definition process starts to really kick in? Are you starting to feel interested in the same sex yet? It’s usually the children that are affected most; perhaps your son’s been listening to bieber or you found a stash of gay porn on his hard drive?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Psycho Milt. You see I don’t read things the same way you do. I thought the objection was to promoting homosexuality. Propaganda.

    My view is that no woman chooses abortion as she chooses a dress. It is not nice. It is up to her to decide between the lesser of the two “evils” she faces. Right at the time.

    I do not feel strongly about infanticide. If people don’t want to breed it doesn’t bother me, the world is not short of people. They are not permitted to kill my children.

    Homosexuals exist. I doubt many have much choice. They must be allowed to lead their lives as best they can, as indeed we all must. I very much doubt, despite the bravado, homosexuals would not change if they could. Maybe one day that will be possible, although as homosexual acts have now received validation through “marriage” it seems unlikely there will be much pressure to find a way to help them.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @RRM. Do you spit or swallow?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. ciaron (1,315 comments) says:

    PM said… And what kind of fucked-up school would be promoting gender inequality anyway?

    loaded wording there, but I assume by this you really mean:

    And what kind of fucked-up school would be promoting normal biological function anyway?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. Harriet (4,522 comments) says:

    “I’m gay” will now be the ‘tell tale’ sign of self loathing – a mental issue!

    Here’s why:

    Gays have passed their ‘final hurdle’ and taken the one word in the english lexicon that describes a hetrosexual relationship: Marriage. In the belief that they will now be ‘equal’!

    So everthing is now A OK – by their very own definition! And by government decree!

    However the gays will still be in the same position as they were before ‘marriage equality’ in that, they will still not accept their own sexuality, as they will still screech “I’m gay!” – a sexual differance!

    Mark my words – they arn’t equal, never have been, and never will be.

    And by saying “I’m Gay” ect – is admittance of that!

    They’ll never get over being gay. :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. Psycho Milt (2,267 comments) says:

    DPF: From 1840 to 1867, homosexual activity in NZ wasn’t just illegal but was punishable by death. 145 years later, same sex couples can marry. We have come a very long way as a country.

    BEREND: We haven’t come a long way, but backtracked a long way. Homosexuality wasn’t illegal in Greek and Roman times.

    It was Christianity that changed all this.

    Well, yes. It’s really only god-botherers of one form or another who think people should be killed for engaging in unpopular sex acts. What’s not obvious is why that should be seen as a good reflection on god-bothering.

    @Psycho Milt. You see I don’t read things the same way you do. I thought the objection was to promoting homosexuality. Propaganda.

    I read things the way they’re written. “Gender equality” has to do with gender, not homosexuality. Maybe he used the wrong term, or maybe the new pet peeve for religion enthusiasts is trannies rather than poofs, but the loonier fringes of Christianity (of which Fletch is very much a denizen) hate gender equality as much as they hate homosexuality, so it seems reasonable to take him literally.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. chilli (1 comment) says:

    I don’t hate Gay people, I have worked with them and many are nice people sure that’s fine if you want to live together with your Civil Union go for it. The amount of people that disagree with this is huge and a referendum should have been a given. I will always believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman.
    I am sad that it is probably too late, I agree though I would be very surprised if John Key gets another term as Prime Minister. Grow a back bone stop pleasing the few and stand up for what you are turning into a depraved and wrecked country. What? You want to grow the tourism industry and be seen as a country who is accepting of everyone. Namby pamby bullshit.
    Goodbye Gay Zealand, I’m off to Australia, or wherever there is a sane prime minister.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. Harriet (4,522 comments) says:

    “….but the loonier fringes of Christianity (of which Fletch is very much a denizen) hate gender equality as much as they hate homosexuality, so it seems reasonable to take him literally….”

    There is only one gender ‘equality’. That is, both genders, male and female should be treated the same, and have the same rights. For the most part, fair enough.

    However, ‘gender’ is an observation at birth, and is not an arbitary decision that a midwife makes. Penis is male and vagina is female. Both fit together.

    That’s all there is to it.

    Unless you are stupid enough to think that wife beaters are gorillas trapped in a male’s body.

    Or a transexual is a female trapped inside a male’s body.

    Some people really are that fucken stupid! :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. Longknives (4,464 comments) says:

    A mate of mine made the interesting point last night that he found it ironic that Williamson was mocking,sneering and making jokes about the Catholic Church but was only too happy to join into the Maori prayer…

    So it’s open game for the National Party on Catholics but other religions must be respected eh?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. kowtow (7,634 comments) says:

    longknives

    A significant proportion of National sold out some time ago.They are the party that has given the largest amount of taxpayer money away to the Maori grievance industry ,with top up relativity clauses.

    This from the party that promised to abolish the racists seats!

    They have a very cosy relationship going.

    But like you say happy to engage in Catholic bashing but play the enlightened liberal white guy with those prayers.

    These guys have lost their conservative compass. They are out of touch with their base.

    I note there was little if any comment on the Nats who were orginally for this but then voted against Brownlee,Coleman,McCully McKelvie.Was it electorate pressure?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. Yvette (2,692 comments) says:

    Harriet – Gays have passed their ‘final hurdle’ and taken the one word in the english lexicon that describes a hetrosexual relationship: Marriage. In the belief that they will now be ‘equal’!
    So everthing is now A OK – by their very own definition! And by government decree!

    And confirmed by CAMPBELL LIVE audience 17,000 who polled 78% [to 22%] against the ‘equality’ bill.
    Yeah! you can take a horse to water but you can’t make the bugger drink.
    _____________

    Shunda barunda – Just like Sue Bradford, remember? how she ended all child abuse in NZ by changing the law?

    You have apparently missed that Bradford’s law has just shifted the abusers to a lower age group. Parents now yet older brothers and sisters to discipline younger children because siblings can not be charged.
    These people may be criminal but they aren’t fucking stupid.

    Oops! – that musta been the wrong side of the bed

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. xy (152 comments) says:

    Harriet: even ignoring transsexuals, you should really read the wikipedia page on intersex. Sometimes gender is in fact an arbitary decision a midwife makes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    Homosexuality wasn’t illegal in Greek and Roman times. …
    It was Christianity that changed all this. No wonder that when Christianity is in retreat, the nation goes completely back again where it came from.

    1. Back to an advanced and prosperous empire ?

    2. Back to world leading science, technology, philosophy and so on?

    3. Back to tolerance & logic?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. Mr Elbow (30 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne sounds like Roald Dahl – if Dahl had traded his talent for creepiness.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Kea (3,408) Says: April 19th, 2013 at 10:51 am
    1. Back to an advanced and prosperous empire ?
    2. Back to world leading science, technology, philosophy and so on?
    3. Back to tolerance & logic?

    Is this a back passage?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. graham (2,215 comments) says:

    Many MPs on both sides of the debate have come out of this process in a good light. Whatever their view may be, they have been able to have genuine conversations, have shown respect for opposing views, and have treated their opponents with dignity and respect.

    Kevin Hague, sadly, is not one of them.

    Kevin Hague has come out of this looking very bad indeed. He has been derisive of anybody who disagrees with him, painting all opponents as extremist religious fundies or people who are afraid of the possible outcomes. He has accused his opponents of whipping up hysteria and panic, of engaging in blackmail and playing on people’s fear of being seen as being on the wrong side of history.

    And sadly, even in his speech on the night in Parliament, he stated that there was no room for taking a middle ground – that history would record whether his fellow MPs stood on his side, or stood on the side of “extremism, threats and blackmail.” How ironic that someone who accuses his opponents of whipping up fear, should himself attempt to intimidate people by inferring that they will go down in history as that nasty person who voted the wrong way.

    Kevin Hague has shown a rather bitter, mean-spirited attitude to anybody who dares disagree with him, and has made sweeping generalisations in an attempt to belittle his opponents. How sad he could not be more like some of his fellow MPs who genuinely acknowledge other people’s viewpoints.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    Dennis, ask a Priest.

    I heard a lisping effeminate faggot priest yesterday, bemoaning gay marriage. I had to laugh.

    To be fair, priests are not into marriage anyway. (probably because their preferred partners are not of consenting age)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. graham (2,215 comments) says:

    Kea: “To be fair, priests are not into marriage anyway.”

    Huh? Catholic priests, maybe, but every single priest I’ve ever known personally has been married. And all have children.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    graham, yes I know. We have a minister here at work. Him and I have some interesting chats :) He is a top bloke. Actually we agree on most things, aside from me being an atheist.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. graham (2,215 comments) says:

    Most of the ministers I’ve known have been pretty decent blokes (and the occasional female minister also).

    Probably my favourite minister was one I knew in Manurewa in the 80′s. He used to smoke like a chimney (usually with my wife, who made it her job to clean out all the cigarette butts from the plant just outside the church) and would settle arguments with cantankerous members of the youth group by putting them in a headlock. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. gump (1,488 comments) says:

    @Longknives

    Maurice Williamson wasn’t mocking the Catholic Church. He was mocking the celibacy of priests.

    Celibacy should be mocked. It’s a horrible lie that leads priests to the rape and sexual abuse of children.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. Longknives (4,464 comments) says:

    Really Gump? I didn’t hear him sneering and making jokes during the ‘Oh-So-Sacred’ Maori prayer….

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. Chuck Bird (4,682 comments) says:

    Scout Masters do not take a vow of celibacy.

    A homosexual who is attracted to adolescent boys can find either the Priesthood or the Scouts as an excellent cover.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  122. RRM (9,467 comments) says:

    Chuck Bird – We’d better ban gay marriage then, to put a stop to all that :lol:

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  123. Chuck Bird (4,682 comments) says:

    Some homosexuals are honest. You bigoted liberals should listen to these.

    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/why-get-married/4058506

    Why get married when you could be happy?

    http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/2012/06/lms_20120611_0905.mp3

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  124. cossackstomper (24 comments) says:

    We all have very short memories when it comes to the Civil Unions Bill. Helen Clark said she would do nothing to take away from the sanctity of marriage. Well it turned out true. she didn’t do it John Key and a very lame National Government did for her by not having a referendum. Here is a little extract from June 2004 oh how short our memories are!

    Russell Fairbrother: What other changes to the Marriage Act are proposed by the

    Civil Union Bill?

    Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE: The answer is None. The proposed Civil Union

    Bill does not change the Marriage Act. The institution of marriage remains solely available to a man and a woman, and the terms husband and wife and marriage are not removed from any legislation.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  125. RRM (9,467 comments) says:

    Outraged that things politicians say in the 21st century are different than things said by other politicians in the 20th century?

    It’s fairly simple cossackstomper –

    The civil union bill was A THING, and this marriage (definition of marriage) amendment is.. well…. ANOTHER THING ;-)

    Tell me more about this “sanctity”… I presume you are married? Do you feel like your marriage is any less sacred today than it was two days ago?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  126. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @RRM. Not so sure it’s as you think. Had a call today from one of our lot, a doctor in an important British hospital, with a lot of things to think about. Always blase about homosexuality and homosexual couples: “Oohh, Dad!”(Exasperation.) Now it’s gone through feeling very miffed.

    Common law marriage is a concept. It’s not just a bit of paper. It has a long lineage. That’s not something you can just wave away. The queers can have the bit of paper, but they will never have “Marriage”. That has its roots in the beginning of life itself.

    Instead of going off half-cock, why don’t you try to understand what I am saying. You cannot destroy what is just because you don’t like it.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  127. RRM (9,467 comments) says:

    The queers can have the bit of paper, but they will never have “Marriage”. That has its roots in the beginning of life itself.

    So why are you still complaining,then?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  128. kowtow (7,634 comments) says:

    cossackstomper

    Just goes to show you can’t trust politicians.doesn’t really matter what colour they claim to be.

    There really are very few men of integrity out there any more. some,but few and far between.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  129. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @RRM. Because the word “marriage” and the concept are inextricably linked, aren’t they? That’s language, isn’t it? We no longer have a unique word for “traditional” marriage. Why would queers want the word, otherwise, except to “steal” the heritage. In a sense, the concept has been lost, because we have no name for it any more.

    You and I understand what marriage is because we talk about it, experience it. In a few generations all that is left is the bit of paper from the state. Its real meaning has gone.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  130. Urban Redneck (234 comments) says:

    And we all know what level of esteem Helen Clark held “marriage” in don’t we? For her, being “married” was a necessary step to start her long journey up the greasy political pole, so she went off and “married” a closeted homosexual sociologist.

    @ Chuck
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10813552
    http://wonderfulnow.blogspot.co.nz/2012/05/one-more-thing-before-i-go.html

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  131. Urban Redneck (234 comments) says:

    Kevin Hague has shown a rather bitter, mean-spirited attitude to anybody who dares disagree with him

    And what makes it even more unpalatable is to see folk like Mr Farrar and Mr Slater fawning all over this extreme leftist Hague and licking his boots. Although having said that, Mr Farrar has a habit of fawning over homosexual politicians in general.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  132. Urban Redneck (234 comments) says:

    If a man can marry a man and raise a child, then the demarcation on marital roles into “husband” and “wife” no longer applies and the parental categories of “father” and “father” is made redundant.

    “Parent One” & “Parent Two” as the new US passport form now says or “Progenitor A” & “Progenitor B” in the case of Spanish birth certificates.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  133. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    Maurice Williamson wasn’t mocking the Catholic Church. He was mocking the celibacy of priests.

    Celibacy should be mocked. It’s a horrible lie that leads priests to the rape and sexual abuse of children.

    I am not convinced that celibacy (or being a priest) leads to deviancy. I think it is a situation where sexual deviants are attracted to a celibate life style. I think that accounts for high number of kiddy fiddlers in the church.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  134. nasska (10,680 comments) says:

    Kea

    …”I think it is a situation where sexual deviants are attracted to a celibate life style”….

    Tend to disagree…..I reckon that it’s more a case of paedophiles seeking to put themselves in positions of trust where they have contact with children & authority over them.

    For all the stick I give the left footers I don’t consider that their church is any more overrepresented by deviants than schoolteaching or youth organisations….it’s the sick way they shuffled the offenders around rather than make them face up to their acts that earns my contempt.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  135. Chuck Bird (4,682 comments) says:

    @Urban Redneck

    Thanks for the link. You have confirmed what I suspected. Cam Slater is one big hypocrite and loud mouth bully with mental problems who believe his own bullshit. I heard him on radio say how he would walk down the footpath when he was angry and others would step out of his way.

    I bet he would do so in Howick but not Otara.

    What a fucking lowlife. His loyal wife stuck with him throw all his problems and his public hypocrisy. He rubbished those on a sickness benefit for years yet was happy to be on one him self and more than likely his his money with a trust.

    One human quality I look up to is loyalty. I hope his wife has given him his final warning.

    Typical libertarian.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  136. Rufus (621 comments) says:

    This was never about rights.

    There are still sections of NZ society that are denied rights that others have.

    Sections of society are discriminated on the basis of age, for example, in legislation all the time.

    Oh the shock, the horror! I expect you liberals to work as tirelessly to obtain equal rights for them as you did for those nice young men.

    You fucking simpletons. How the hell is “getting married” a “right”? Does poor old single Betty have the right to get married? Yes, you say. But she isn’t. Nobody wants to marry her. But it’s her right! So government, society – do something! Make her get married! Make someone marry her – it’s her right!

    You imbeciles. How can it be a right when it requires the willing consent of another free individual? It’s a privilege. And you cannot legislate for that.

    “Equality” – what bullshit. What ever happened to “celebrating our diversity”?

    Two men is not the same as two women is not the same as woman/man. A child recognizes this. What mental contortions you adults have to force yourselves through to make 1+1=3.

    Why not celebrate “different but equal”?

    This was never about “equality” or “rights”.

    The clue is in the title of the bill – “Marriage (definition of marriage) Amendment”.

    And while my lovely but naive wife hopes that “the others” will show some of that “tolerance” they’ve been clamouring for so long, cynical, realist old me realises the knives are now out. Difference of opinion are not allowed, but will be hounded into silence, squashed and crushed with mockery, ridicule, and eventually the full weight of the law.

    Hague, Walsh, and the whole fucking light-headed liberal lot of them do not exactly shine “tolerance”, love and goodwill for their fellow men/women of a different persuasion, now do they? DPF’s not too bad, but Cam as a pin-up boy of the new regime? Be afraid. Lock up your kids, and your Jaquie-s.

    Bunch of lying, cheating, thieving, hypocritical little shits. Conservatives? My arse.

    Mene, Mene, Tekel, Tekel, Upharsin.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  137. Liberal Minded Kiwi (1,563 comments) says:

    Not sure what makes me happier, the passing of this law or the tears and toy throwing from the fossil conservatives that spent all those months, huffing and puffing about the fall of society just because a few gays want to marry.

    This was a losing battle from the beginning for you and now I get to bask in watching you suffer.

    Isn’t it funny. Most of you idiots go to your local church and pray for love, tolerance, acceptance and everything else that your bible preaches – and yet as soon as you get home, it’s all forgotten as you spit your bile online. I am pretty sure God knows what you get up to when you’re surfing the internet. Your behaviour is just as sinful as of those you condemn.

    Good luck with that. Hypocrites.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  138. Doctor Who (45 comments) says:

    Liberal Minded Kiwi (1,525) Says: April 20th, 2013 at 1:19 am
    This was a losing battle from the beginning for you and now I get to bask in watching you suffer.

    You hit the nail on the head. This was always about a very small group saying: “Fuck you up the arse you cunts we’re just as good as you are.” Oh, the irony.

    These threads have been about the defence of the word marriage, not an attack on queers, whom most people were pleased to ignore.

    Porn. If queers had stuck to computers we wouldn’t have AIDS. They became infected with HIV and spread it amongst themselves then into the heterosexual community by shagging dopey women.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  139. Nukuleka (213 comments) says:

    It is obvious that the debate on same sex ‘marriage’ will not end as readily as some may hope – just as the debate on abortion didn’t end with the passing of the Bill Birch compromise that has resulted in NZ’s current free-for all abortion on demand. Both issues centre on what many view as clear cut moral issues. Marriage is between a man and woman and abortion is murder. For many, including many gay men incidentally, these are unchangeable absolutes. The debate on both will continue.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  140. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    And that is a good place to end.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  141. Chi Hsu (85 comments) says:

    Well, the debate finished at 9.30 pm last night, but the celebrations carried on much longer. I got home at 4 am and finished the night with a quarter pounder at McDonalds – my first one in around a year and a half! It was badly needed to soak up the alcohol – and oh yeah it tasted great! Fuck, I’ve missed them :-)

    Those famous words of Shylock in the Merchant of Venice come to mind: “Hath not an [animal] eyes? Hath not an [animal] hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections passions; fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die?”. And I would add: “And if we are not equal before the law, are we not lesser beings?” So I come at the issue of marriage equality simply on the basis of equality before the law.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  142. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    A young man wants to be an airline pilot. He can get a private licence (PPL) but cannot get a commericial licence because he cannot pass the medical; he is colour blind. Does he not bleed … ?

    Copulation is essential for natural procreation. Homosexuals cannot copulate for pleasure. It’s an abnormality. Why should they get a marriage licence? Copulation and rearing any offspring being the essence of marriage, the formalisation of this special relationship between men and women, rooted in the beginnings of life itself.

    All this twaddle about Love and Caring being the essence of marriage is nonsense. It is a component but it is not that which differentiates it from other relationships. Some men love, live and care for a brother. Are they to be married? No. No sex.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  143. BR (80 comments) says:

    “My marriage is between two people, as are all marriages”

    That could change.

    Bill.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  144. Silly Will Bunions (143 comments) says:

    Urban Redneck (122) Says: April 19th, 2013 at 4:10 pm
    What is even more unpalatable is .. Mr Farrar has a habit of fawning over homosexual politicians

    Well not quite. The fawning is not so much over homosexual, as much as it is fawning over things ‘anal’. I well remember Mr Farrar’s link here a cuppla years ago, to the internet’s most disgusting picture ever of anal perversion. Rhymed with ‘stoats flee’ from memory, but I would never actually post a link as Mr Farrar did.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.