SSM - Local debate (1)

That was in last week's Macarthur Advertiser. I responded with a letter, which was published this week (1st May, 2013), along with three others.

This provides a good example of the inability of SSM opponents to come up with a good case.

Mr. Wyer misses the point and argues that gays cannot be trusted to raise children, whilst Ms Bond informs us of her god's plan, then also gets herself tangled up in the same irrelevant argument about children. Gays have been raising children for a long time (whether their own or adopted or fostered). There is no evidence to suggest that gays make worse parents, as [name supplied] of Eagle vale validly points out.

This brings me back to one of my two central arguments in the SSM debate - that the opponents of it simply have no strong arguments to offer. They simply say the first thing that comes into their head - and it is usually one of the oh so weak arguments I listed in a previous post. The other central argument, of course, is that everyone (yes, including gays) deserve equal rights.

See <here> for a list of anti-SSM arguments.

See <here> for the new Liberal Party Principles, amended to suit opponents of  SSM.