Homosexual activists deeply pissed off. 
At the “trivialization of marrriage”, would you believe! Bawaaaahahaha!
‘Mates’ marriage horrifies gay rights groups’
Francis Porretto:
‘…The dudgeon of the homosexual activists is a truly delicious item of Biter Bit. Having trivialized marriage by demanding that it be stripped of all relation to its functions, they have discovered that they’re not the only players in the game – and that the rules are not in their favor.’
At least their motives are completely honest and are not designed to trivialise marriage – the homosexuals have already done that in their efforts to make the institution obsolete. Its nice that the homosexuals have taken offence – get used to it and at last have some understanding of how most many felt when you hi-jacked marriage. Suddenly not so gay after all?
Well said, i hope more people do things like this, trivialize and piss all over their hard-fought gains. I can’t wait to use their own arguments against them.
Sorry bigots 2 straight men getting married has no effect on your same-sex marriage. Please don’t impose your beliefs on everyone else bigots. If you don’t like it, then don’t get married.
“LegaliseLove Aotearoa Wellington co-chairman Joseph Habgood said the competition attacked the legitimacy of same-sex marriages.”
Mmmmm where have we heard such a similar phrase before and it was just dismissed by the homo lobby. Suck it you hypocrites. Hard-fought ey? Yeah well, you don’t get to decide who gets married and who can’t you nasty bigots.
When the basis of your position is simply that, two people who love each other, have the right to get married, well then you don’t get to then decide who marries and who can’t. So shove off bigots.
What of “equality” then? Wasn’t the argument in favour of the destruction of traditional marriage that any two people ought to be allowed to marry? That there are multiple genuine expressions of love?
Men have been marrying women, and vice versa, for innumerable reasons (including financial) since time began. So, now men are legally permitted to marry men and women, women, surely then they can also do so for any reason they desire?
That’s what happens, ass-bandits, when the law of unintended consequences walks up and punches you in the face.
I seem to recall that the TV show “Boston Legal” ended in this way with the two major characters marrying for $$$$ reasons….? (William Shatner and James Spader?) Perhaps life is imitating TV art?
Ah, the Law of Unintended Consequences…
..ain’t she a bitch!
Irony-free zone. Hello? HaHa. Seriously, the same sex advocates assure us that they wouldn’t possibly want polygamy so no worries there. Bloody hell, at least in polygamy as I know it, the sexes are BLOODY DIFFERENT! As long as polygamy is not subjugation and a frickin religious fort, I think it at least comes on the scale of what may be deemed physically acceptable. That said, if the old fella came home with some bint wanting a discussion about sharing the love, he and she probably wouldn’t reach the door unharmed.
Surely, no man would be that brave.
Or foolish…
What if he brought home a 20 something,strapping young football player and told you that he was your thursday,friday,saturday husband in-law while he was off fishing the rest of the week.Would that be physically acceptable?
finally! – Homosexual wacko activist’s true colours exposed
….
nothing to with “equality” …disturbed individuals with big chips on their shoulders can’t be “normal” or want the same equal rights..why would they want that?..they survive on drama, in the limelight and BEING treated differently.But we already know that here- the rest of the sheeple populous don’t .
I’m still laughing reading this!
Yep , Two hetro Scottish men getting hitched so they can attend the Rugby WC.
are they- RACIST? , no! HETROPHOBICS i tell ya!
What are these homo mafia types complaining about?