NZ First will abstain in gay marriage vote

21/08/2012 5:15:49 p.m.

Seka wrote:

Curwen from the NZ First Youth Party is a nice guy, with his head generally screwed on well. Unfortunately some of the other MP's (and now regrettably Mr. Peters himself) are letting the whole party down. Mr. Peters can claim that his party has no position on this issue, but it is quite clear that he is siding with religious conservatives.

21/08/2012 5:11:56 p.m.

Matt wrote:

Rick, unfortunately your argument is invalid. Regarding incest, there are firmly understood biological reasons for abstaining from incest - most notably the heightened risk of recessive genetic diseases if one were to conceive. If, however, you were to agree not to conceive then I would have no problem with this so long as it were between two consenting adults. I am also fine with polygamy, this was the norm for a great deal of time in many different cultures (and still is in some), as well as across other species. Clearly murder is not comparable as it inflicts objective suffering upon another individual. This obviously contrasts against sexual relations between consenting adults, not resulting in suffering. One can certainly be 'truly logical' in ones moral code, if such a code is based on objectively demonstrable facts.

4/08/2012 8:06:17 p.m.

Rick wrote:

I have no problem with gay marriage, so long as those who promote and practise it are completely consistent. You have said that marriage is a human construct, and of course, outdated. Therefore, new moral codes have been developed, and society must move foward and accept them. Well then you must carry your thinking right through to completion. You cannot simply make this one change. You must allow anything. There are, by your very definition, no moral absolutes so you cannot disallow me to express myself. I have my own morals, perhaps more advanced and developed than yours. I don’t accept those morals and values put upon me by society. Therefore, you must accept the views of those who believe in incest, polygamy and so on. These people, like you, do no accept the moral code slavishly adopted by narrow minded people. They do not accept a merely human construct, some form of moral constraint from others. People should be free to act as they please. But you cite ‘love’ as the binding moral code by which nobody can judge your actions. Alright then, please tell me, what is love? It is a mere human construct, no more evil, or good (because you say there is no evil or no good) than murder, rape, theft, bestiality, brutality? Of course, you will not abide by this. For you say it is ‘wrong’ for someone to rape our murder you or your loved one. But see, your logic has failed you. You must be consistent. Who are you to judge that person? They are expressing themselves. Just as you have rejected all moral absolutes or codes. You say we have evolved to a more civilised society that than that now. Really?? Every history book that I have read says this is what we have always been doing, and still are doing. So you must jettison any moral constructs that exist, and be truly logical, and embrace the amoral society that you are seeking in full not pick and choose from it those things that ‘seem’ best to you.