Intolerance unleashed

comment   | print |

One wonders what a study of news stories involving pro-marriage campaigners and their opponents on the gay lobby side would show if some guage measuring degrees of tolerance were to be applied to the opposing parties’ behavious. On the basis of a first impression the story reported here by Frances Kelly would seem to leave us in little doubt as to what the conclusion might be.

It is often the case that the presenters of reasoned and reasonable arguments end up driving their opponents to a level of frustration which makes them explode violently – because they have no reasoned argument with which to respond. Is this a case in point?

Frances Kelly writes:

For years gay rights activists have asked, "How will same-sex marriage affect your marriage?" as if it is only their own relationships that will be effected.  This hate crime shows that a lot more is at… click here to read whole article and make comments



Marriage = biology (not bigotry)

comment   | print |

When it comes to the behaviour of its citizens a government has only three options: it can promote, permit or prohibit their behaviour. Here are the reasons government should promote natural marriage and not support same-sex marriage. An excellent five-minute video.


click here to read whole article and make comments



10 reasons not to redefine marriage

comment   | print |

Here's an excellent resource. The Coalition for Marriage, a UK group that supports traditional marriage and opposes any plans to redefine it, has released "10 reasons why the government is wrong to redefine marriage". Clear, crisp and cogent. Read it here or download it from their website.

10 reasons why the government is wrong to redefine marriage

click here to read whole article and make comments



New York court rules DOMA unconstitutional

comment   | print |

Because homosexuals are discriminated against and are a “politically weakened minority”, a divided federal appeals court in New York ruled yesterday that the US Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional. The decision by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was split 2 to 1. After only three weeks of hearings, it found that there was no reason why homosexual couples should be denied benefits available to married heterosexual couples.

The court was not persuaded by arguments in favour of DOMA. Preserving tradition is not the purpose of law; the promotion of procreation, while it is a legitimate government interest, is not related to this legislation. The overriding concern of the court was discrimination. On that it had much to say. It concluded that discrimination against homosexuals should be given “heightened scrutiny”, in the same way as discrimination against women was in the 1970s.

"The question is not whether homosexuals have achieved political successes over the years; they… click here to read whole article and make comments



Where are the facts backing up California’s ban on conversion therapy for minors?

comment   | print |

California recently passed a law banning sexual orientation change efforts for men and women under 18 by psychiatrists and psychologists.  Mental health providers are no longer allowed to give therapy which tries to “change behaviors or gender expressions, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.”

According to the legislator behind the new law, State Senator Ted Lieu, “children were being psychologically abused by reparative therapists who would try to change the child’s sexual orientation. An entire house of medicine has rejected gay conversion therapy. Not only does it not work but it is harmful. Patients who go through this have gone through guilt and shame, and some have committed suicide.”

These are strong claims. Conjugality asked Dr Philip Sutton whether so-called reparative therapy was being abused in this way. Dr Sutton is a licensed psychologist, therapist and counselor based in Indiana and Michigan.… click here to read whole article and make comments



Heterosexuality “not the norm”, says Australian school programme

comment   | print |


The normalisation of same-sex relationships received a setback recently in Australia when the federal parliament lower and upper houses threw out bills that would have allowed same-sex “marriage”. Nevertheless, the normalisation campaign continues on many fronts.

A report in the Australian Daily Telegraph today reveals that a programme teaching that it is wrong to regard heterosexuality as the norm for relationships is being piloted in 12 schools in the Australian state of New South Wales. There’s a similar programme in the state of Victoria. Academics and sexual libertarian groups such as Family Planning have had a heavy hand in them.

The target of these programmes is not just anti-gay discrimination and bullying but something much more radical -- what the theorists of the sexual diversity movement call “heteronormativity”. Training for teachers in the Proud Schools scheme advises them to “focus on the dominance of heterosexism rather than on homophobia”. Watch out… click here to read whole article and make comments



Luca era gay

comment   | print |

Sorry, we missed this one. It’s a bit off the central topic of Conjugality, which is same-sex marriage, not homosexuality. But since one of the main arguments for same-sex marriage is the unchangeable nature of same-sex attraction, this video will be of interest.

“Luca era gay” won second prize at the San Remo Music Festival in 2009. The artist, Giuseppe Povia, is an Italian pop star who often sings about social issues. In this controversial piece, he narrates the conversion of Luca from homosexuality back to a normal lifestyle. The lyrics are not very poetic – at least in English – but the tune is catchy. Instead, they weave a psychological narrative about young man with a possessive mother and a weak, distant father who seeks affection among gays.

The song is based on the real-life story of Luca di Tolve, once an activist with the gay Italian group Arcigay. After a number of… click here to read whole article and make comments



Where is the science behind California’s ban on orientation change for minors?

comment   | print |

“The attack on parental rights is exactly the whole point of the bill because we don’t want to let parents harm their children,” he said. “For example, the government will not allow parents to let their kids smoke cigarettes. We also won’t have parents let their children consume alcohol at a bar or restaurant.” – California State Sen. Ted Lieu, as quoted by the Orange County Register, August 2, 2012


Sponsored by state Senator Lieu (D-Torrance), California Senate Bill 1172, which will prohibit mental health professionals from engaging in SOCE with minors under any conditions, appears on its way to the desk of Governor Brown and could very well become state law.   The most important revision to the bill reads as follows:

865.2 – Any sexual orientation change efforts attempted on a patient under 18 years of age by a mental health provider shall  be considered unprofessional conduct and shall subject a mental health… click here to read whole article and make comments



It’s just not fair, is it?

comment   | print |

Segregating genders in marriage to suit the sexual attractions of less than 2% of  the population isn’t enough.  This woman with same-sex attraction wants scientists to “try harder” and give “priority” to making it possible for two women to procreate.  Michelle Cheever says:  “I want to have babies the way straight people do." In the Huffington Post we read:

What I mean is that I want the ease, the convenience, the -- dare I say it -- naturalness that straight people have when starting a family. I want both the simple beauty of two people loving each other so much that they'd like to see more of the other in the world, and I want that simple beauty to be translated into scientific terms of fairness: chromosomes and DNA given in equal amounts from two parents. 
The attitude I have always taken to having a baby with… click here to read whole article and make comments



Approaching the last taboo

comment   | print |

Lisa Miller in the Washington Post did a bit of exploration a few days ago on the next big thing in the marriage destruction industry – polygamy.

She takes her line from one, John Witte Jr., a scholar of religion and law at Emory University in Atlanta. Witte is working on a lengthy history of polygamy due out next year. He believes that polygamy is the next frontier in marriage and family law. If states are able to dismantle traditional or conventional views of marriage by allowing two men or two women to wed, then why should they not go further and sanction, or at least decriminalize, marriages between one man and several women?

This of course is familiar territory to those who know Kody Brown and his "wives", the stars of the US reality television show “Sister Wives”.  Brown – and his “wives” - are making in a civil suit against… click here to read whole article and make comments


Page 1 of 2 :  1 2 > 

Conjugality deals with the true nature of marriage and the challenges it faces today. Our current focus is on the campaign to legalise same-sex marriage. We'd love to get your comments and suggestions. Send an email to

rss Conjugality RSS feed

Follow MercatorNet
subscribe to newsletter
Sections and Blogs
Family Edge
Sheila Reports
Reading Matters
Demography Is Destiny
Conniptions (the editorial)
contact us
our ideals
our People
Mercator who?
partner sites
audited accounts
advice for writers
New Media Foundation
Suite 12A, Level 2
5 George Street
North Strathfield NSW 2137
+61 2 8005 8605
skype: mercatornet
© New Media Foundation 2016 | powered by Encyclomedia | designed by Elleston