Allan Takes Aim Blog

Apology

Posted on: 20 April 2013


I make this apology because it is my custom to reply to every comment. However due to a technical hitch, the comments I made in reply to three correspondents who commented on the blog ‘Forget marriage; introduce wedding contract contracts’ a few days ago disappeared. The following three are replacements.
—————
Scott Para 1 Not knowing anything about Kansas Law I can make no comment on the Roger Gorley affair particularly as your comments are made on the basis of a media report. As the hospital questions the alleged train of events and regardless of your comment about homophobia in Kansas, it seems to me you have selected something that suits your belief.

Para 2 You might light to re-think your comment

Paras 3 & 4 I did write that good things could come out of fighting for Utopian fairness. That apart, while “Love and Marriage” is a lovely song that extols a romantic view the reality is often different. And if you meant that law and process can never be diminished by mere law why does society bother with law and process in first place? Isn’t civilisation important? And on the question of validation I merely restate that a ‘rite’ is not a “right.”

Para 5 I’m glad you think equality can be defined under the law. However, I would like to see the legal tome of definitions. Mind you, it’s always nice to have a law to suit your convenience which is why a serious look at my suggestion should be taken.
——————–
pbj 253 Thanks for your comment. Let me suggest you ask qualified lawyers what they think.
——————–
Ilzude I am not sure what you mean when you ask: Why do LGBT’s have to accept nature? If they didn’t they wouldn’t be here and as to the importance of procreation, where would they be without it?

I am aware also of heterosexuals who have never reproduced. My daughter is one. Nature did not gift her with the capacity to reproduce. And why would children be penalised when LGBT people can’t conceive by natural coupling?
And if you re-read my article my article I do not promote hetero marriage but hetero contracts.

As to the bible not only should your read the tales concocted by wandering scribes you should also read the history of the real world that existed in ancient times.

Don Allan

Advertisements

3 Responses to "Apology"

Paragraph 2 was the most important point. I’m baffled why you think it need rethinking.

It might help if you stated what you think is a “Human right”. I think marriage is a human right for everyone. Not just an officially sanctioned marriage but perhaps we have very different ideas about what marriage is. Even Heterosexual marriage.

Para 3&4: I said a right cannot be diminished by a law. Rights exist above laws. Rights are not granted by law or god. They are part of the human condition. Laws merely enshrine rights, not create them. I refer here to Human Rights not legal rights.

Equality under the law does not need a tome of definitions. That is ten Commandments style thinking. That’s like trying to define life by first defining every living thing. The absence of inequality, the absence of specific carve-outs and exceptions are what promote equality. If the Australian parliament is anything like the American congress and I’m sure it bears more than a passing resemblance then you will be very familiar with exceptions to laws and regulations created for specific companies for example. It is usually a bad idea when done for industry, it’s even a worse idea when done to people. What you are proposing is like saying that some people can own a house and live in it but others can only buy a house and live in it but you can’t call yourself a home owner. If you can’t see the significance of the difference then you simply don’t get it.

Gay Marriage will never make sense to those who see gay first and people second.

I doubt many heterosexuals will find you proposal acceptable for themselves. I know of no homosexuals who do.

I can only say I am equally baffled with your lack of understanding particularly as the title of the blog says “forget marriage.”

As for not getting it 50% of couples in Australia don’t get married. And I just take people as people. I don’t care if they are LGB or T. And yes I have asked hetero couples if they find my proposal acceptable. Lots of young ones say yes because they think marriage outdated while most old ones say no.

I don’t know how many homosexuals you’ve put my proposition to but in Canberra the Australian city that pro rata has more LGBT people in its population than any other Australian city, but many who have read read my earlier proposals about the same subject, do accept it.

But let me end this particualr correspondeence by saying that on this issue I doubt we will ever agree.

You may have titled the post “forget marriage” but you are simply changing the legal process around it. In my experience and I have many friends who are young and single they don’t plan on marrying so the point is moot to them. Unfortunately I am late already so the rest of my thoughts will have to remain mine.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


  • None
  • chilecomex.com: This site was... how do I say it? Relevant!! Finally I've found something that helped me. Thanks a lot!
  • sua tarefa: I blog often and I truly thank you for your content. This article has really peaked my interest. I will bookmark your blog and keep checking for new
  • ZAP Stun Gun: I love it when people come together and share views. Great site, continue the good work!
%d bloggers like this: