Humbling to have community support
As a recently returned serviceman (40+ years) it is appropriate to acknowledge the contribution to the community in the Warragul/Drouin area by RSL Warragul, Young Veterans and Voyage Fitness.
Those organisations have recognised the need to facilitate veteran fitness and have taken tangible steps to achieve that objective.
Young veterans, via Bob Green, coordinated with various organisations to attain a local facility to enhance veteran’s fitness, RSL Warragul provided the funds, Voyage Fitness the facility and supervision at discounted rates.
Given the arduous training and operation endured by serviceman, most if not all, finish their service with multiple and permanent injuries. Injured backs, knees, feet, skin cancer, deafness, are the default body damage.
Add the malevolence of PTSD, that may not manifest for years after leaving the military, the ability to attend fitness courses allows us to get fit, regain our mutual fellowship and importantly reconnect with our civilian counterparts.
This is not an advertisement but credit is due and on reconnection; each time over the last 15 years I returned on leave to Warragul I went to Voyage (and its previous incarnation), Anthony and his staff not only remembered me but were at pains to make me feel comfortable and at home.
Those ex-servicemen who have moved to the district and have perhaps eschewed contact with the RSL I can only say that the Warragul RSL led by Noel Tucker and Young Veterans have our interest at their core. We should return that interest by joining those organisations.
To have a community support us is humbling. Thank you. Bill Westhead, Warragul
Marriage law has changed over time. Until 1884 married women were not allowed to own property.
Restrictions were placed on indigenous and non-indigenous people intermarrying in 1918 and that wasn’t altered in some states until 1961. Up until 1942, girls as young as 12 and boys as young as 14, could marry.
In 1961 across Australia a minimum marrying age of 18 was introduced. Up until 1966 women who were married were barred from working in the Commonwealth Public Service. In 2004 John Howard amended the marriage act to ban same sex couples from marrying.
This survey is supposed to help politicians decide whether another change needs to be made to the Marriage Act. The Marriage Act like all pieces of legislation needs to be reviewed and, if necessary, altered as circumstances change.
The question in the survey asks “Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?”
If we can shut out all the misleading hyperbole that is being thrust at us, and just focus on that simple question, then the survey may actually mean something.
For some people it is an equity and justice issue. For others it is a moral and religious issue. For most people it will not change their world, but for many same-sex couples it will make a world of difference if a change to the law is made or not. Greg Tuck, Warragul
Homosexual marriage legislation extended by existing anti-discrimination legislation in Canada (2005) and Britain (2013) has proven to be a bigots' charter for sexual fanatics to persecute and punish those who reject aberrant behaviours.
For Canada the website (thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/04/;14899) cited by Helen Case (12/9/17) provides a detailed article by Dawn Stefanowiicz, who was raised in a homoseual marriage which she wholly repudiates as a proper type of parenting as she has in a book entitled, 'Out from under: the impact of homosexual parenting'.
Her article displays the onflow of legislation which grossly inhibits freedom of speech and opinion with gross financial penalties before a tribunal for infringements.
Daniel Mansour, who fails to mention the book or the author's upbringing, glibly misrepresents the detail of the website article as "illegitimate fear mongering".
He should carefully study it in a slow re-reading as I hope other Gazette readers have done. Perhaps he could also read David Sergeant's 'What's changed in Britain since same sex marriage" in the Spectator Australia (7/9/17). Gender fluidity wantonly imposed on small children and parents unable to withdraw their children from perverted sex education classes are but two of the gross iniquities enumerated.
Thus far the mainstream Australian press has been gravely remiss in failing to examine the tumultuous social, moral and legal consequences of homosexual marriage. And Daniel Mansour's unreferenced partisan opinions masquerading as facts are no substitute
Frank Carleton, Longwarry
Bricks to the people who put junk mail in our mail box when it clearly reads “No junk mail’
Most supporters of SSM think they are supporting equality and justice. I applaud these values. But the proponents of SSM have a different agenda.
“Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there. [We say] that the institution of marriage is not going to change. And that is a lie. … I don’t think it [marriage] should exist.” (Masha Gessen 2012 Sydney Writers Festival)
Michelangelo Signorile urges gays “to fight for same-sex marriage and … then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely, because the most subversive action lesbians and gay men can undertake … is to transform the notion of ‘family’ entirely.” (Out Dec 1992:161)
“Same sex marriage is a breathtakingly subversive idea.” (E.J. Graff The American prospect June 28, 2012)
Why must marriage and family be abolished? Marriage and family is an authority structure – useful as a ‘check and balance’ in any civil society. Totalitarianism sees any other authority as competition and therefore must be destroyed. Are the proponents of SSM really promoting totalitarianism?
The abolition of marriage was tried in Russia following the Bolshevik revolution in 1917, which resulted in “the fall of social order, culture, and then the economy, unleashing a tidal wave of crime, corruption, sexual debauchery and chaos.
When Stalin came to power , he took immediate steps to restore order. The family and ethics were restored, abortion and divorce made difficult to obtain, etc. … for which they [the Bolsheviks] hate him to this day” (http://herrickreport.com/newsovietunion.html) Must we repeat history? Janet Cowden, Neerim South
A big bouquet to the Richmond Football Club on their fantastic premiership win. It has put big smiles on the faces of many long suffering fans.
Another brick to people that litter our beautiful surrounds. There is yet another shopping trolley in Hazel Creek near Rotary Park and a long line of rubbish over the freeway bridge on South Rd. This area is truly beautiful and people should respect that.