• Home
  • About
  • Objectives
  • Membership
  • Donations
  • Activities
  • Research Reports
  • Submissions
  • Newsletters
  • Contact

SPCS

SOCIETY FOR PROMOTION OF COMMUNITY STANDARDS INC.

  • Censorship
    • Censorship & New Technology
    • Film Ratings
    • Films
  • Crime
    • Rape statistics
    • Television Violence
    • Violence
    • Youth Crime
  • Enforcement
  • Family
    • Anti-smacking Bill
    • Families Commission
    • Marriage
  • Gambling Addiction
  • Political Advocacy
  • Pro-life
    • Abortion
  • Prostitution
  • Sexuality
    • Child Sex Crimes
    • Civil Unions
    • HIV/AIDS STIs
    • Homosexuality
    • Kinsey Fraud
    • Porn Link to Rape
    • Pornography
    • Sex Studies
    • Sexual Dysfunction
  • Other
    • Alcohol abuse
    • Announcement
    • Application For Leave
    • Broadcasting Standards Authority
    • Celebrating Christian Tradition
    • Children’s Television
    • Complaints to Broadcasters
    • Computer games
    • Film & Lit Board Reviews
    • Film & Lit. Board Appointments
    • Human Dignity
    • Moral Values
    • Newsletters
    • Newspaper Articles
    • Recommended Books
    • Submissions
    • YouTube

Fidelity in marriage an issue for gay men – NZ Herald article by lecturer and author – Laurie Guy

August 31, 2012 by SPCS Leave a Comment

All you need is love. That is the theme song of pro-same-sex marriage proponents. It is the slogan of Louisa Wall, author of the same-sex marriage bill. If two gay people love each other and want to “marry”, why don’t we allow this? But is love enough?

In answering that question, we need to be aware of two other questions: what is marriage? And why is the state involved? The latter question is crucial, because the core issue is one of affirmation, not rights – rights can be dealt with by specific legislation without amending the Marriage Act and upsetting lots of people.

Apart from conveying rights, marriage provides affirmation that the state/society encourages this relationship as a good thing. A crucial question is whether gay relationships are such a good thing as to be endorsed by society as “marriage”.

We should look at the issue of social endorsement through four lenses: love, commitment, health, and society’s interests.

Let’s begin with love. What is “love”? The word covers a raft of sometimes contrary meanings, from sexual desire centred on “my” self-gratification, to heroic self-giving for another. Both heterosexual and same-sex unions may well pass (or fail) this test. The love issue does not debar same-sex marriages.

However, love alone is not enough. It can be fleeting and transient. If marriage is to be serious and not trivial, it needs longevity, buttressed by commitment and faithfulness.

What of gay commitment and faithfulness? Long-term lesbian relationships on average may well be as committed and faithful as that of an average married heterosexual couple. The problem is the gay men.

Some male gay couples are as committed and faithful as typical married heterosexuals. Survey evidence, however, indicates that these are very much a minority.

Significant data on male homosexual behaviour is available through New Zealand Medical Journal articles and the New Zealand Aids Foundation website. The Aids Foundation and the Aids Epidemiology Group at the University of Otago have conducted biennial surveys, the Auckland Gay Periodic Sex Surveys, for the past decade.

The 2010 results covered the sexual behaviour of 1527 gay men in 2008. On the commitment side, the survey indicates that the most common number of sexual partners for gay men over the previous six months was two to five. Just 38.8 per cent of those surveyed had a partner of more than six months’ standing (i.e. relationships with some level of commitment).

However, 52 per cent of these men had also had sex in that period (six months) with other partners. So despite the rhetoric of love and commitment, most male gay couples are not in a genuinely monogamous relationship. Should the meaning of “marriage” be broadened under such circumstances?

There is also the health issue. Male-to-male coupling typically has far greater health risks (because of high levels of anal sex). Both with casual and with “boyfriend” sex the percentage engaging in anal sex is over 80 per cent. Anal sex is never fully safe. Although condoms reduce the risk of sexually transmitted diseases (including HIV/Aids) by around 85-90 per cent, risk remains (because of user misuse or product failure).

Risk is far greater without condom protection. Although 98 per cent of those surveyed knew that anal sex without a condom is very high risk for HIV transmission, 73 per cent did not use a condom at least once in the past six months (the figure for casual sex was 31 per cent).

The result is high levels of sexually transmitted infections amongst gay men. Over 60 per cent of new infectious syphilis cases are gay men. This category also has high rates of gonorrhoea and hepatitis. And 76 per cent of all new HIV diagnoses in 2000-2009 were gay men.

Can we affirm male gay relationships to the level of “marriage”, given the data on faithfulness and health? One can argue change on the basis of “me”, “my rights” and “choice”. But the debate is also about the good of society.

What society needs are stable, faithful, healthy relationships. Stable marriage has gravely weakened in the last generation. There is deep hurt and scarring of many, especially children, as a consequence.

In a direct sense gay “marriage” will not make this worse. Indirectly, however, it will, because it makes marriage, which for many is becoming vague and fuzzy, vaguer and fuzzier still. It is social engineering – with its negative aspects ignored.

We need to have a deep and wide debate, looking at all factors. The same-sex marriage debate is currently far too simplistic. The draft bill is a daft bill.

Laurie Guy is author of Worlds in Collision: The Gay Debate in New Zealand 1960-1986 (Victoria University Press, 2002). He lectures in church history at Auckland University’s school of theology, and also at Carey Baptist College.

Source: Fidelity in marriage an issue for gay men. 31 August 2012

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10830082

Note: The Objects of the Society for Promotion of Community Standards Inc. include: “To focus attention on the harmful nature and consequences of sexual promiscuity ……” (s. 2d of Constitution).

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Print

Filed Under: HIV/AIDS STIs, Homosexuality, Marriage, Moral Values, promiscuity Tagged With: Aids Epidemiology Group, Aids Foundation, gay marriage, gonorrhoea, hepatitis, HIV transmission, HIV/AIDS, Marriage Act, same-sex marriage

Marriage Amendment Bill – Seventy church leaders oppose same-sex marriage bill

August 29, 2012 by SPCS Leave a Comment

In a media release issued on  Wednesday 29 August 2012 …

Seventy church leaders, including numerous national heads of major church denominations both Catholic and Protestant, are speaking up in a joint personal statement on the day of the first reading of the Marriage Amendment Bill, which would allow same-sex couples to marry.

 “We have made this joint statement”, said Rev. Dr Richard Waugh, “because members of Parliament need to be in no doubt what mainstream Christian views are on this matter.”

 Joint church leaders’ statement:

“This issue is not about equality but about the nature of marriage. All human beings are equal in the sight of both God and society, but not all relationships are the same. Marriage has uniquely been about the union of male and female. The State should not presume to re-engineer a basic human institution. The complementary role of male and female is basic to the very character of marriage, along with having and raising children. Same-sex relationships are intrinsically different, so can never be regarded as true marriage.

Parliament needs to take seriously that, for a very significant proportion of the New Zealand public, marriage is more than just a legal agreement or social contract, but has a  sacred character to it, and that many people – Christian and otherwise – feel very strongly that the nature of marriage should not be interfered with.

In 2004, the public was assured by the Prime Minister and other MPs that marriage would be respected as the union of a man and a woman, and that Civil Unions were a good and acceptable alternative, offering equivalent legal protections to marriage itself. It is now time for Members of Parliament to recall and honour those assurances.”

Signed by… 

–        Rev. Dr. Richard Waugh QSM (Wesleyan Methodist, National Superintendent)

–        Archbishop John Dew (Catholic)

–        Rev. Craig Vernall (Baptist, National Leader)

–        Bishop Patrick Dunn (Catholic)

–        Rev. Dr Merv Duffy SM (Catholic, Lecturer in the Theology of Marriage

–        Rev. Dr Stuart Lange (Presbyterian; Senior Lecturer, Laidlaw College) 

–        Rev. Mark Whitfield (Lutheran, President of Lutheran Church of New Zealand)

–        Rev. Max Scott (Anglican)

–        Bishop Denis Browne (Catholic)

–        Rev. James Lee (Presbyterian)

–        Rev. Dr Sarah Harris (Anglican, New Testament Lecturer, Carey Baptist College)

–        Rev. Peter Benzie (Wesleyan Methodist, National Secretary)

–        Mr Glyn Carpenter (Director, New Zealand Christian Network)

–        Rev. Fakaofo Kaio (Presbyterian, Moderator of Northern Presbytery)

–        Rev. Rhys Pearson (Presbyterian)

–        Rev. Illiafi Esera (Assemblies of God, Superintendent)

–        Pastor Eddie Tupa’i (President, North New Zealand Conference, Seventh-day Adventist  Church)

–        Rev. Steve Maina (Anglican, New Zealand Church Missionary Society) 

–        Rev. Ian Guy (Presbyterian)

–        Bishop Charles Drennan (Catholic)

–        Rev. Kim Francis (Presbyterian)

–        Rev. Murray Robertson (Baptist)

–        Pastor Lloyd Rankin (National Director, Vineyard Churches Aotearoa New Zealand)

–        Rev. Michael Hewat (Anglican)

–        Rev. Ian Hyslop (Presbyterian)

–         Rev. Nick Kirk (Anglican, Dean of Nelson Cathedral)

–        Pastor Ken Harrison (Harvest Christian Church Papakura, AOGNZ)

–        Rev. Steve Millward (Presbyterian)

–        Bishop Barry Jones (Catholic)

–        Rev. Brian Brandon (Presbyterian)

–        Rev. Andrew Carley (Anglican, Leader Latimer Fellowship)

–        Rev. Ben Dykman (Presbyterian)

–        Rev. Mike Hawke (Anglican)

–        Pastor Mike Griffiths (Elim, National Leader)

–        Bishop Colin Campbell (Catholic)

–        Captain Peter Lloyd (Anglican, former Director, Church Army New Zealand)

–        Rev. Dr Stuart Vogel (Presbyterian)

–        Rev. Dr Myk Habets (Head of Carey Graduate School, Carey Baptist College)

–        Rev. Eric Etwell (Anglican, Administrator of AFFIRM)

–        Pastor John Steele (National Leader, New Life Churches International)

–        Rev. Dr Mark Keown (Presbyterian; Senior Lecturer, Laidlaw College)

–        Mr Peter Eccles (Chairman, Auckland Congregational Union churches)

–        Rev. Dr Neville Bartle (National Superintendent, Church of the Nazarene)

–        Rev. Steve Jourdain (Presbyterian)

–        Pastor Peter Mortlock (Senior Pastor City Impact Church)

–        Rev. Lindsay Jones (Baptist)

–        Pastor Jerry Matthews (President, New Zealand Pacific Union Conference of the Seventh  Day Adventist Church)

–        Pastor Dr Brian Hughes (Calvary Chapel)

–        Rev. Emma Keown (Presbyterian)

–        Dr Rod Thompson (Principal, Laidlaw College)

–        Dr Laurie Guy (Baptist, Vice Principal, Carey College)

–        Rev. Dr Colin Marshall (Presbyterian)

–        Pastor Rasik Ranchord (New Life Churches International

–        Rev. Andrew Marshall (National Director, Alliance Churches of New Zealand)

–        Rev. Dr Martin Macaulay (Presbyterian)

–        Pastor Bruce Monk (National Leader, Equippers Church)

–        Rev. Charles Hewlett (Principal, Carey Baptist College)

–        Pastor Alan Vink (National Director,Willow Creek Association NZ)

–        Rev. Hung-Yi Pan (Wesleyan Methodist)

–        Rev. Tom Phillips (Presbyterian)

–        Rev. Stuart Crossan (Anglican)

–        Rev. Peter Dunn (Presbyterian)

–        Rev. Ruth Boswell (Wesleyan Methodist)

–        Rev. John Gullick (Presbyterian)

–        The Very Rev. Rob Yule (Presbyterian, Former Moderator)

–        National Leadership Team (Christian Churches New Zealand)

–        Rev. Toeaina Leiite Setefano (Presbyterian – PIC)

–        Rev. Stephen Woo Taek Nam (Presbyterian)

–        Rev. Dr Geoff New (Presbyterian) 

For further comment, contact:

Rev.  Dr Richard Waugh QSM

Email: rjw@wesleyan.org.nz

Ph 09 2716460

Or

Rev. Dr Stuart Lange

Email:  smlange@xtra.co.nz
Ph 09 8325775
021-0224-2957

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Print

Filed Under: Announcement, Marriage Tagged With: Marriage Amendment Act Bill, same-sex marriage

Pro-Marriage Website (www.protectmarriage.org.nz) launched by registered charity – Family First NZ

July 30, 2012 by SPCS 2 Comments

Family First NZ, a registered charity (Reg. No. CC10094) that was registered with the Charities Commission on 21 March 2007, has announced that:  “A website to protect the current definition of marriage as ‘one man one woman’ has been launched today. The website is www.protectmarriage.org.nz and has been launched in response to the private members bill of Labour MP Louisa Wall which seeks to redefine marriage.”  [The registrant of the domain name protectmarriage.org.nz is Family First NZ, which purchased it on 4/08/2011].

“The website will provide research, latest news, quotes of interest, free downloadable resources about the role and function of marriage, and will host an online petition which will be presented to Parliament,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “It also has the haveyoursay tool which enables people to easily contact their local MP, all MP’s, or a select group of MP’s to express their view.”

“Politicians have been hammered recently with the reasons for taking the twink bottle to the dictionary and to redefine ‘marriage’. This website will help balance the debate. Ultimately, the state – which did not invent marriage – has no authority to re-invent it.”

Family First also rejects the notion that NZ’ers are ready for same-sex marriage. In the US, polls have also shown support for same-sex marriage increasing, yet in every state where the issue has been on the ballet, voters have rejected it.

“Equality does not mean we must redefine marriage. Same-sex couples have the option of civil unions to recognise their relationship so there is no need for redefining marriage. If the law was redefined to allow same-sex marriage, and only same-sex marriage, we would then be discriminating against those seeking, for example, polygamous, polyamorous, or adult incest unions,” says Mr McCoskrie. “If we are going to have a debate about same-sex marriage and liberalising adoption laws, it is essential that the politicians acknowledge just how far this is going to go.”

“Almost every culture in every time and place has had some institution that resembles what we know as marriage, and it has always been associated with procreation. Every society needs natural marriage. Nature also discriminates against same-sex couples. Same-sex couples cannot have children. Only a man and a woman can produce children. This discloses something of the purposes and providence of nature, and the role and purpose of marriage,”

“We would encourage politicians to spend their valuable time focussing on major issues such as family poverty, negotiating our way through the world recession, child abuse, and getting people employed – rather than taking to the dictionary with a twink bottle,” says Mr McCoskrie.
ENDS

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Print

Filed Under: Marriage Tagged With: adoption laws, Charities Commission, Famkily First NZ, incest unions, Louisa Wall, Marriage, one man one woman, same-sex couples, same-sex marriage

Same-sex ‘marriage’ and “gay” adoption debate fuelled by polyamory advocates

June 4, 2012 by SPCS Leave a Comment

Lover of twins adds new twist to moral debate.

Belle Glasby, Marc Glasby and Dorothy Loader appeared on television talking about their ‘poly’ relationship. Marc Glasby and his two partners – wife Belle and identical twin sister Dorothy – last night poured new fuel on the growing debate over sexuality and marriage in 21st century Australia.

Their appearance on SBS Television’s Insight programme added polyamory to the already furious debate over same-sex marriage and the associated debates over gay adoption and lesbian access to IVF birth programmes.

Advocates of polyamory – intimate relationships involving three or more people – have ruffled feathers in the gay community, caused grief for the Greens, and strengthened religious determination to preserve male-female marriage as the nation’s only legal option.

The debate is being hammered out in a parliamentary inquiry into two bills aiming to legalise gay marriage and to recognise those performed abroad.

Gay marriage was a fraught issue long before polyamory’s entry. It split the Labor Party and became policy only after Prime Minister Julia Gillard, who opposes the move, struck a deal requiring a conscience vote in Parliament.

The Opposition opposes same-sex marriage, while the Greens’ policy advocates marriage for all, regardless of sexuality or gender identity.

For full story by Greg Ansley, published 30 May 2012, see:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10809419

[Read more…]

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Print

Filed Under: Marriage Tagged With: 'poly' relationship, gay marriage, multiple marriages, polyamorists, polyamory, polygamous relationship, polygamy, same-sex marriage

Where Do Politicians Stand On Polygamy? – asks Family First NZ

May 30, 2012 by SPCS Leave a Comment

In a Media Release issued today, Family First NZ, a registered charity with the Charities Commission,  is asking the question:

Where Do Politicians Stand On Polygamy? …………

Family First NZ is calling for the National, Labour and Green party to state where they stand on the issue of redefining marriage to allow polygamy and polyamory.

“Polygamy and polyamory have been added to the same-sex marriage debate in Australia because the ‘discrimination’ argument being used to argue for allowing same-sex marriage also applies to any number of adults who love each other and want their relationships recognised,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “At the moment, the New Zealand marriage law does discriminate against three or more people getting married, or a married person marrying another person.” [Read more…]

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Print

Filed Under: Marriage Tagged With: polyamory, polygamy, same-sex marriage

« Previous Page
Next Page »
SPCS Facebook Page

Subscribe to website updates:

The Pilgrim’s Progress

Getting "The Pilgrim’s Progress" to
every prisoner in NZ prisons.

Recent Comments

  • John on The term ‘Homophobia’: Its Origins and Meanings, and its uses in Homosexual Agenda
  • SPCS on Corporate corruption in New Zealand – “Banning badly behaving company directors”
  • Anne on Corporate corruption in New Zealand – “Banning badly behaving company directors”
  • Jake on John Clancy: Troubled Global group costs Christchurch City Council another $37,000
  • Jake on John Clancy: Troubled Global group costs Christchurch City Council another $37,000

Family Values & Community Standards

  • Coalition for Marriage
  • ECPAT New Zealand
  • Family Voice Australia
  • Parents Inc.

Internet Safety

  • Netsafe Internet Safety Group

Pro-Life Groups

  • Family Life International
  • Right to Life
  • The Nathaniel Centre
  • Voice for Life
(Click here for larger image)

Copyright © 2025 · News Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.