Maqqa wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 12:40pm:

Did Rudd and Gillard spend three years in a known pedophilia environment ? Evidence. Or it's a lie?

Maqqa wrote on Jun 15^th, 2013 at 12:45pm:

Thanks for confirming you lied.sucker.

It seems the loony right Abbott supporters wish to go down the road of exploring the personal sexuality of people in politics, or any people associated with them.

If that is really what they want to do, then it would be hard to find a better starting point than discussing the sexual beliefs of devout Catholics and evangelical Christians who seem to share very similar views on the subject.

We have very many devout religious folk on both sides of politics, and whether they have the ability to maintain a separation of their personal beliefs and their political duties is possibly a question that the public wishes to know.

Now that the loony right have cracked this particular egg  should we stir it, rather than trying to get it back in it's shell?

We know there are Religious beliefs that demand that things like contraception, masturbation, numerous types of foreplay, etc. be considered as perversions. This may seem unlikely in the 21st century, but that is the case for devout christians and catholics whose religious beliefs demand they consider almost everything apart from genital intercourse intended to result in procreation, as sexual perversions.
Even heterosexual genital intercourse is permissable, only if the couple are married in the church of their faith, outside of marriage even straight sex is a sin worthy of earning them eternal damnation.

We have heard people asserting that muslim politicians would seek to have polygamy allowed under australian law, as a natural extension of respecting an individuals right to pursue religious freedom. Is it not logical to assume the same freedom to pursue religious teachings of devout christians might also be expected?

So, with this in mind, does that mean we need to convene a star chamber to interrogate our politicians to find out where they stand on matters of sexuality?

Is it in the public's interest to determine if politicians personal sexuality will impact upon the laws and regulations that we are all expected to abide by?

When will you queers finally understand that homophobia is a made up word purely to attack normal humans. There is no link to hidden desires of gay acts or being gang raped by gays. Hetro's that dislike gays is not a fear as the made up word homophobic states. Hetro's that dislike gays particularly gay men is because of the disgusting act homo's enjoy doing ie having sex with the same sex, gays just try to justify the act by using the word love, and mutual consent.
The fact is natures law goes against gays. You can debate all you like using words such as politically correct, humanitarian, and love, but a fact is a fact and natures way is the only way which is scientifically  supported. Homosexuality should be treated as a disease just like cancer, a cure should be priority to rid the human race of this filthy sickening act.

Abbott is clean, his is hetero, Dillard has Dike written all over her. Dillard is in a relationship with a male..........reminds me of when Elton John got married to a female.

Mozz

You mean 1 weird radio commentator in WA ?

Bit of storm in a tea cup, but maqqa is right why does Abbott's religion needs looking into as opposed to Gillard's sexuality ?

If you can address that to start with and then you need to address Gillard's desire to create phoney personal attacks ...... somewhere down the track you might be talking about something that might count politically.

Bashing Abbott has been going on for over a decade, no one cares.