Guess how the left transmutates that with its core ideology.

And who gets to pay for the exercise of these ‘granted’ rights.

It will never stop, there will be religious discrimination, gender discrimination, racial discrimination.

It becomes ‘positive discrimination. Women reduced to a quota, loony clerics get funding to promote the burkha and Nigerians thrown in with Ethiopians.

In the end what matters is a fragmented society to each their own and please don’t ever disclaim the ghettoes.

I hope you do realise you’ve just rendered homosexuality an artificial mental state enjoying the victory of scientific determinism.

Such is the confusion brought about by the frenzy two decades in the making.

If homosexuality is natural, it is preposterous to refuse nature’s design criteria in procreation. But I suppose spinning a coin to land it in conjunction with political expedience isn’t yours.

Alas, that’s where rational conservation of human dignity makes way for votes and lobbies blackmail. From yesterday’s Times of Malta;

‘…Asked whether the government is considering amending the law to allow surrogacy for gay (and heterosexual) couples, Dr Dalli said there was no intention to do so.

However, she added, a motion was approved last week in Parliament stating that no person can be discriminated against on the basis of his or her sexual orientation.

If a person decides to take the government to the European Court of Human Rights, the government would be obliged to comply with the ruling, as what would have happened with the case of transgender Joanne Cassar had the new government not settled her case out of court…..’

In an age where rights are made to trample each others’ holders, simply because responsibility is of fundamentalists, the vicious cycle requires arbitrary leaders whose position is continually reinforced with their benevolent Solomonic prowess.

What would happen to adopted children in the case of divorce between same-sex couples?

In much of the West many men are already just sperm donors, only they entered into the contract thinking it was a life-long commitment.

Then they go on to surrender two-thirds of their income to the new daddy of their children and their ex-wife + children.

Fathers are now being viewed as unnecessary – much to the detriment of society. And excluding them is seen as hip and justified.

A single voice reproduced by a notoriously anti-gay organisation. Yes, the report in question contradicts three decades of studies which come to no such conclusion. You should probably also read this article (and the links therein) about the report and it’s author too then:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014/03/04/mark_regnerus_testifies_in_michigan_same_sex_marriage_case_his_study_is.html

“There’s one problem: Regnerus’ research doesn’t show what he says it does. Not remotely. No research ever has. Yet Regnerus, unchastened by a chorus of professional criticism correctly pointing out the obvious flaws in his work—including a formal reprimand in an audit assigned by the journal that published his piece—continues to make these groundless claims, knowing full well they are baseless.”

And, if I may add, these arguments need to come across to the general public, not just the LGB community.

How long do we have to wait before we get a same-sex couple applying for a divorce?

Will the case be treated in the same manner as in a heterosexual case?

Or will the same-sex couple just go their separate ways until they begin a fresh relationship with new partners?

The adoption issue was handled very poorly by the current administration.

I wholeheartedly approve of the Opposition’s stand.