Gay Law Change May Force Us To Divorce - Canberra CityNews

Gay law change may force us to divorce - Canberra CityNews
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
About us
Contact us
Advertise with us
Letters to the Editor
Competitions
Canberra CityNews
All about Canberra
Navigation
News
Politics
Arts
Lifestyle
Home & Garden
Authors
Digital Edition
Socials
Gay law change may force us to divorce
NICK JENSENs wife Sarah is the only woman hes ever loved; but the couple is prepared to divorce in protest against any
change to the law to accommodate same-sex marriage. My wife and I, as a matter of conscience, refuse to recognise the
governments regulation of marriage if its definition includes the solemnisation of same-sex []
Share this:
Facebook
8K+
Twitter
129
Pinterest
Tumblr
More
Like this:
Like
2 bloggers like this.
by CityNews
on June 10, 2015
in News
125 Comments
MY wife and I just celebrated our 10-year anniversary. But later this year, we may be
http://citynews.com.au/2015/gay-law-change-may-force-us-to-divorce/
Page 1 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
getting a divorce.
Happy couple facing divorce; Nick Jensen and his

wife Dr Sarah Jensen
Jensen As Christians, we believe
marriage is not a human invention. Our view is
that marriage is a fundamental order of creation.
The reason has nothing to do with the state of our marriage. We were married at 21 after being highschool sweethearts for several years before that.
In fact, my wife is the only woman I have ever loved, the mother of our children, my perfect match.
So, the decision to divorce is not one weve taken lightly. And certainly, its not one that many will readily
understand. And thats because its not a traditional divorce.
Page 2 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
You see, after our divorce, well continue to live together, hopefully for another 50 years. And, God willing,
well have more children. Well also continue to refer to each other as husband and wife and consider
ourselves married by the Church and before God.
So why do this? It will certainly complicate our lives as we try to explain our marital status on the
sidelines during Saturday sport. The reason, however, is that, as Christians, we believe marriage is not a
human invention.
Our view is that marriage is a fundamental order of creation. Part of Gods intimate story for human
history. Marriage is the union of a man and a woman before a community in the sight of God. And the
marriage of any couple is important to God regardless of whether that couple recognises Gods
involvement or authority in it.
My wife and I, as a matter of conscience, refuse to recognise the governments regulation of marriage if
its definition includes the solemnisation of same sex couples.
The State (initially England) only got involved in marriage laws in 1753. For the 600 years before that in
Europe, the Church acted as the official witness. Before the church had this role, marriage was simply a
cultural norm ensuring children had the best possible upbringing.
In Wales, for example, a couple would jump over a broomstick in the doorway of their new home to be
married, and jump back across it to divorce. In fact, the main reason the State got involved at all was to
address financial problems with property and inheritance law.
This otherwise odd move of the State into marriage was ultimately permitted as long as it was seen as
upholding a pre-existing societal good. Families, as the basic building block of communities, benefitted
from the support and security of formal legislation.
If our federal parliament votes to change the timeless and organic definition of marriage later on this
year, it will have moved against the fundamental and foundational building block of Australian society
and, indeed, human culture everywhere.
Indeed, it raises a red flag when a government decides it is not content only having sovereignty over land,
taxes and the military but words themselves.
Page 3 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
This is why we are willing to divorce. By changing the definition of marriage, marriage will, in years to
come, have an altogether different sense and purpose.
It will not be about the mystery of difference in sexual unity, as children come from gendered
dissimilarity. It will not be about building and securing communities into the future.
When we signed that official-looking marriage certificate 10 years ago at Tuggeranong Baptist Church, we
understood that the state was endorsing marriage, as currently defined, as the fundamental social
institution with all that this implied.
But if this is no longer the case, then we no longer wish to be associated with this new definition.
Marriage is sacred and what is truly marriage will only ever be what it has always been.
Its worth saying that our decision is not as extreme as it may seem. We will still benefit from the same
tax and legal provisions of the states de facto laws.
However, what is significant is this issue will echo the growing shift from state education to private
religious institutions.
This shift is no doubt because the majority of Australians, who are people of faith, believe their children
are better served there. If the federal government pursues a change to the definition of marriage it will
further alienate and divide the community.
For example, there are many Christian denominations that will simply stop officiating for any civil
marriages rather than go along with the government on this.
Many Christians, like my wife and me, as well as people of other faiths, will simply reject the need for the
State to recognise their marriage. Instead they will look to the authority of their church, mosque or
temple. But there are broader implications for everyone, not just people of faith, to consider on this
issue; for example, childrens rights, religious freedom, freedom of speech, and the broader fundamental
rights of conscience and association. With our medias relentless push to get this over the line, these
issues have barely been noticed so far in the national debate.
This has been a big decision for my wife and I. Some will accuse of us being bigoted or too hateful to
share. But this couldnt be further from our intentions.
Page 4 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
The truth is, marriage is simply too important. It is a sacred institution, ordained by God. It has always
been understood to be that exclusive relationship where one man and one woman become one flesh.
Any attempt to change the definition of marriage by law is not something in which we are able to partake.
Here we stand, we can do no other, and I know we are not alone.
Nick Jensen is the director of the Lachlan Macquarie Institute, which helps develop leaders in public
policy (lmi.org.au)
UPDATE: Nicks brother Soren has penned a reply that bears reading.
Share this:
Facebook
8K+
Twitter
129
Pinterest
Tumblr
More
Like this:
Like
2 bloggers like this.
marriage, Nick Jensen, same sex marriage
About CityNews
View all posts by CityNews

Follow CityNews on Twitter
Facebook
Digital edition 11 June
Coe vows to tear up light rail contracts
Search...
Subscribe to our daily email

Page 5 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Email
Daily Email
Digital Edition
Subscribe!
Connect with CityNews
Canberra weather
15.4C
Feels like 15.4C
Partly Cloudy
Today:
16C / 5C
Tomorrow
Tuesday
Wednesday
15 / 8
14 / 8
13 / 6
Data powered by
Popular
Latest
Comments
Gay law change may force us to divorce June 10, 2015

Bad news for the Jensens divorce plans June 12, 2015
Jensen divorce protest / Its time, says brother June 11, 2015
Save our city; Easthope blasts the Budget June 3, 2015

Gungahlin drive to be widened June 10, 2015
125 Responses to Gay law change may force us to divorce
1.
Jn Valur Jensson
June 14, 2015 at 11:06 am #
It is altogether understandable that people are appalled at homosexual marriage, as from time
Page 6 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
immemorial, and still even with the vast majority of mankind, this has not been seen as natural.
Platos vision was right: any leniency in these matters will have detrimental effects on society.
And how can some Christians presume to know better than God Himself in these matters of
marriage? How dare some Christians to contradict the Creators words, and the Son of God, about
marriage of man and woman?
Reply
2.
vee705
June 14, 2015 at 3:13 am #
They need to understand traditional Biblical marriage:

11 This is what you shall do: every male and every woman that has lain with a male you shall
devote to destruction. 12 And they found among the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead 400 young
virgins who had not known a man by lying with him, and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh,
which is in the land of Canaan.
13 Then the whole congregation sent word to the people of Benjamin who were at the rock of
Rimmon and proclaimed peace to them. 14 And Benjamin returned at that time. And they gave
them the women whom they had saved alive of the women of Jabesh-gilead, but they were not
enough for them. 15 And the people had compassion on Benjamin because the Lord had made a
breach in the tribes of Israel.
16 Then the elders of the congregation said, What shall we do for wives for those who are left,
since the women are destroyed out of Benjamin? 17 And they said, There must be an inheritance
for the survivors of Benjamin, that a tribe not be blotted out from Israel. 18 Yet we cannot give
them wives from our daughters. For the people of Israel had sworn, Cursed be he who gives a
wife to Benjamin. 19 So they said, Behold, there is the yearly feast of the Lord at Shiloh, which is
north of Bethel, on the east of the highway that goes up from Bethel to Shechem, and south of
Lebonah. 20 And they commanded the people of Benjamin, saying, Go and lie in ambush in the
vineyards 21 and watch. If the daughters of Shiloh come out to dance in the dances, then come out
of the vineyards and snatch each man his wife from the daughters of Shiloh, and go to the land of
Benjamin. 22 And when their fathers or their brothers come to complain to us, we will say to them,
Grant them graciously to us, because we did not take for each man of them his wife in battle,
neither did you give them to them, else you would now be guilty. 23 And the people of Benjamin
did so and took their wives, according to their number, from the dancers whom they carried off.
Then they went and returned to their inheritance and rebuilt the towns and lived in them. 24 And
the people of Israel departed from there at that time, every man to his tribe and family, and they
went out from there every man to his inheritance.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Judges+21%3A10-24&version=ESV
Reply
3.
David Cordover
June 13, 2015 at 5:00 pm #
We need more people supporting TRUE #marriageequality. At the same time we stamp out the
outdated, demeaning and restrictive gender restriction of marriage we need also to address the
Page 7 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
mathematical, emotional and temporal abuses which current laws impose. Why should marriage
be restricted to only 2 people? I say let us provide true freedom and allow an entire village to
marry if they want. And why only to those you love. If I want to marry 40 people for whom I have
feelings ranging from ambivalence to love then why am I denied the opportunity? Or what about
the poor guy who hasnt yet found love but is happy to settle by marrying the guy he really likes?
We would deny him lifelong companionship? For myself I am most angered by the time imposition.
I am prepared to give 10 or even 15 years but not my whole life to my partner. Why should we not
be afforded the same legal protections or societal respect because we choose to have an end date
less morbid than death. I call on everyone to lobby the conservative, bigoted, misguided
lawmakers to allow this institution of marriage to evolve to a truely flexible and modern
expression. The day that happens I will be able to achieve my dream of equality in society by
marrying on this glorious day 18 women, 14 men, 2 transgender and 2 transsexual, some of whom
I dislike, some I think are ok and a few I love, for periods of time ranging between 3 and 53 years,
none for life. And when we achieve true marital enlightenment maybe, just maybe, we can have a
society that does not publicly vilify people just for having a different belief. And we can all get
along.
Reply
4.
vee705
June 13, 2015 at 12:15 pm #
I think someone needs to inform them of traditional Biblical marriage:

Deuteronomy 21:10-14English Standard Version (ESV)
Marrying Female Captives
10 When you go out to war against your enemies, and the Lord your God gives them into your
hand and you take them captive, 11 and you see among the captives a beautiful woman, and you
desire to take her to be your wife, 12 and you bring her home to your house, she shall shave her
head and pare her nails. 13 And she shall take off the clothes in which she was captured and shall
remain in your house and lament her father and her mother a full month. After that you may go in
to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. 14 But if you no longer delight in her, you
shall let her go where she wants. But you shall not sell her for money, nor shall you treat her as a
slave, since you have humiliated her.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+21%3A10-14&version=ESV
Reply
5.
eguavon eguaibor
June 13, 2015 at 11:25 am #
God uses the State to formalise marriage. A secular society will always do things that conflict with
biblical principle.
Responding by getting a divorce is akin to saying that people should plan to sin because they do
not like what the government will do. Furthermore, it is equivalent to wrongly terminating the plan
of God (the will of God) for ones life on the basis of being offended. This is not supposed to
happen and is plainly an affront to God. One does not pull out from Gods will just because an
action is opposed.
Page 8 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
A married couple shouldnt allow a government to move them to divorce, which shows that the
couple is wrongly focusing on the pitfalls of the secular contract rather than the superior and
holy marriage institution which is solemnised on the wedding day. In the event that the Marriage
Act is amended to include same-sex marriage, it should not upset or otherwise affect the holy and
unique spiritual contract that a Christian couple personally and publically makes with God to wed,
to His glory alone.
If Christians start doing this, then it will be a classic example of being enticed by the flesh and not
by the Spirit.
Reply
6.
pro-human
June 13, 2015 at 5:49 am #
Congrats. Your half-cocked threat to get a divorce if Gay Marriage becomes legal is the dumbest
thing I read today- and I work in advertising.
Reply
7.
Timothy Faust
June 13, 2015 at 5:17 am #
That is terrible. Let me just look into my f*** bag here Wait a second. Oh No! It looks like it is
completely empty. Turns out I am all out of f***s to give about you and your nonsense.
Reply
8.
SoccerDad
June 13, 2015 at 4:03 am #
This couple is childish and moronic and downright unchristian.

Reply
9.
morgaine620
June 13, 2015 at 3:49 am #
Well I believe the definition of marriage has been quite different through out the centuries and
millenia. I doubt very much there is only one definition of marriage even though religions tent to
believe in this. This article might give some examples: http://theweek.com/articles/475141/howmarriage-changed-over-centuries.
Reply
10.
Page 9 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Cathy
June 13, 2015 at 2:49 am #
Marriage is a legal and civil contract. Your infantile decision to get a divorce and commit adultery is
your choice. Someone elses marriage has zero affect on you, and your threat is ridiculous.
Reply
11.
John
June 13, 2015 at 2:43 am #
I wish more christian couples would do this. These two are standing up for what they believe in.
Good for them.. Hopefully neither one of them will ever get sick.. or die.. because then they will
enjoy the same bigotry Gay couples have for the last several decades.. being denied the right to be
with the one they love at their dying moments. or being denied any death benefits. Being forced
out of the room because you are not legally spouses and forced to watch the person you have
spent the last who knows how long loving. Good for you guys. Show your good christian values by
suffering the same abuses gay couples have been since the beginning..
Retards..
Reply
12.
Nick
June 13, 2015 at 2:36 am #
Wait they want to get devorced because a contract to an imaginary friends imaginary plan xD?
Yeah go right ahead no one cares, just means you dont love eachother. Its ok your imaginary
friend or the people who actually love eachother wont care one bit :p
Reply
13.
Luigi Severus Fletcher-Bieber-Horan
June 12, 2015 at 11:53 pm #
I am DYING to know which Bible version you two follow Please reply.
Reply
14.
Garry adams
June 12, 2015 at 11:30 pm #
Not the best approach in my opinion.

The better approach would be to lobby and educate our goverment leaders about the dangers of
redefining marriage.
Page 10 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Right now when a man tells someone he is married, it is obvious that it is to a woman. And vice
versa. But imagine the uncomfortable, very difficult and controversial position, when a married
man has to forever add that he is married to a woman, as he wouldnt want to mislead or leave any
doubt that his marrige could be homosexual!
To shift the goal posts after a couple has married is not playing by the rules.
Just imagine redefining the word vegan to include meat eaters? Stupid right? Well thats exactly
the situation before us.
If two men or women want to get together then call it something else.
Reply
Eric Glare
June 13, 2015 at 5:48 pm #
Garry, it just sounds so terrible and difficult for you and one wonders how you will cope: as
he wouldnt want to mislead or leave any doubt that his marrige [sic] could be homosexual.
You could have some gay man or a married bi who ignores wedding rings and thinks he can
smile at you. And if you are like me, your legs will melt, the goal posts move and you will be
speechless with a mouth filled with gluedanger!
It isnt like meat eating vs vegan though as vegan means no meat. Maybe you really want a
word for marriage that isnt so generic but screams straight sex-married because even now
we gay, bi and trans men are being encouraged to marry opposite sex and about quarter or
so of us do for a while. It will get much more complicated with marriage equality as there is
quite an alphabet, HLGBTIQ, and that is just for the individuals. Sarriage or harriage for
straight marriage? You could just be heternormative or norm for short. Theres some ideas
to help.
Reply
Garry adams
June 13, 2015 at 6:38 pm #
Eric Glare, you make no sense at all.

Why should i or anyone, who is married, have to specify, it is to the oppisite sex? This
will be both uncomfortable and highly contraversal!
The vegan analogy is a good one. Vegans dont eat meat, and marriage means man
and woman. Do not reply to me again until you get a medical assessment for that
brain dead comment.
Reply
Jennifer O'Connor
June 14, 2015 at 8:29 am #
OH WOW GARRY! Imagine a world in which humans are so accepting of each other AND
Page 11 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
MATURE that a man could simply say he is married and not have to explain himself any
further, nor feel the need to because he has his act together. Just imagine redefining the
term idiocy to include..every human thats ever demonstrated the an element of(for
crying out loud!)
Reply
15.
Tess
June 12, 2015 at 10:04 pm #
So because other people have the absolute audacity to hold views which differ from yours, Mr & Dr
Jensen, youre throwing a public tantrum and threatening to hold your breath till you turn blue
well, good luck with that, welcome to democracy.
Reply
16.
Francis Gary
June 12, 2015 at 5:57 pm #
Im not christian but I think if you all TRUELY agree with equality for all then you cant judge them
for wanting a divorce its their right to make of marriage what they want to, just like EVERYONE else.
Reply
17.
Hugh Oxford
June 12, 2015 at 5:01 pm #
This is a misuse of the word divorce. The Jensens wont be divorcing at all, they will simply be
de-registering their biological, physical marriage with the state. They will still be physically,
factually married, just as they would be if the state ceased to recognise marriages completely.
Reply
18.
cretaceouskitteh78
June 12, 2015 at 1:58 pm #
Three words: No. One. Cares.

You obviously think your continuing to be married is absolutely vital to every person in your
country if not everyone on the entire planet. Good for you! Congrats on your delusion. You just
keep on thinking youre that important.
P.S. Marriage has been redefined soooo many times. Even disregarding that youre only defining
marriage as the modern, Christian version but even biblical marriage has changed over time. You
forget all of that polygamy and taking of slaves as concubines and wives and incest that went on up
in the Bible. But youre worried about consenting adults who have matching plumbing getting
hitched? And youre getting divorced though the Bible forbids it except in cases of a wifes
Page 12 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
infidelity? OK. That makes complete sense!

Reply
19.
Bradley Steffens
June 12, 2015 at 11:53 am #
Well said, Mr. and Mrs. Jensen. Moreover, I admire the courage you are showing to not merely pay
lip service to your beliefs, but to act on them.
I have said much the same thing for the last 20 years: Why is the state involved in marriage at all?
Unmarried people are penalized (pay a higher tax rate) under American tax law. It is unfair to
them, but it was understood that the state was furthering legitimate interests, and those interests
did not have to do with whether or not people loved each other or wanted to pledge fidelity to
each other. We have Hallmark cards for that. It had to do with structural, societal interests in
creating and sustaining a stable environment for the raising of children. Yes, there were property
interests as well. If representatives of the state are no longer interested in supporting those
structures, fine. That is their prerogative. But why keep these antiquated, unnecessary, and
discriminatory (against single people) laws on the books? Allow people to marry or not marry
privately in religious and secular ways. Baptism also is a sacrament, but the state does not
recognize it nor confer any special benefits upon it. As you intelligently point out, the states
involvement in marriage is a relatively recent development.
Get the state out of marriage. Live and let live. And then lets see how many gays want to get
married.
Reply
Hugh Oxford
June 12, 2015 at 5:20 pm #
Well, there are good reasons for the state to recognise biological marriages, because
biological marriages have physical products namely mothers, fathers and children who
have rights and responsibilities that justice demands are upheld and protected.
I get your point, but we dont want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Yes, it is totally
irrational for the state to conflate same-sex unions with factual marriages, but that means
that the legal definition of marriage should be correct, not that the legal recognition of
marriage should cease.
Reply
20.
svc@telus.net
June 12, 2015 at 11:39 am #
Have at er folks. I wish you all the best in your divorce.

Reply
Page 13 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
21.
Gustivo
June 12, 2015 at 11:08 am #
Thats why I gave up practicing religion. Full of hate and ignorance instead of love, peace,
forgiveness and harmony.
Reply
22.
Tay Swaim
June 12, 2015 at 9:52 am #
Well, Mr. and Mrs. Jensen, youre apparently not very good Christians. For doesnt it say in
Romans 13: Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority
except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the
authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
So, if you divorce, youre simply living with your woman in sin and not following the laws of the
land.
Regardless of if you think youre still married in the eyes of your church, by the laws of your land,
you will not be. Thus, you will be sinning.
Yep, thatll show all of those homosexuals who simply want to be with the ones they love.
Im assuming brains dont run in the family.
Reply
ites
June 12, 2015 at 10:43 am #
What a crap reason not to be jerks. Do unto others.? More proof that moralistic Christians
are the most obnoxious hypocrites on the planet and the worst kind of people. Dear Lord,
save me from your followers.
Reply
23.
Pamela
June 12, 2015 at 9:45 am #
If youre parenting with your genitals, I can safely say that youre doing it wrong.
Seriously though.
Wrong.
Reply
Ben
June 13, 2015 at 1:41 am #
Page 14 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Could not have said it better myself, thank you!

Reply
24.
Mario Strada
June 12, 2015 at 9:31 am #
Nooooooo! Please dont do it.

Actually, now that I think of it, why should anyone care you two are a couple of babies?
Lets play this game together then: If you divorce, Ill hold my breath until you marry back again, in
civil court. If you dont then Ill die of suffocation and it will be on your immortal souls. You may go
to HELL!!! The Humanity!!!
(Disclaimer: The Devil does not exist, hell is not a real place, hell may be open to interpretation
depending on your religion but if it exists we are probably living in it.)
Reply
25.
Ron
June 12, 2015 at 8:41 am #
Ugh boy. This guy actually believes that the state got into the marriage business because it likes to
see people get married. Yeah, thats it. Government is like a really sensitive person who cries at
weddings and throws rice at the bride and groom. And therefore, the fact he and his wife are
getting divorced is going to just absolutely break the poor governments heart (aww) and regret
ever having let those evil gays join in on all the fun. And then the government is going to run after
them in the middle of the night and stand outside their apartment in the rain and beg them to
come back.
Hey dum dum. Government doesnt have feelings. It doesnt *really* care whether youre married
or not. Its simply trying to reward the formation of families, which it rightly or wrongly
considers to be valuable to society as a whole. Marriage is merely a means to an end.
But see, heres the thing. You and your wife still intend on remaining a family. So, the big bad
government still gets what it wants.
In other words, as hard as it might be to believeno one really gives a shit whether you get
divorced or not.
Reply
26.
CP
June 12, 2015 at 8:13 am #
This just may be the dumbest thing Ive read all year. The basis of their beliefs on gay marriage is
Christianity, yet theyre going to divorce (a sin), live together & have sex outside of marriage (sin),
have children out of wedlock (sin), & lie about being married (sin). The hypocrisy is mind-boggling.
I dont know anything about Australian law, but I hope their request to divorce is denied, so they
Page 15 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
look like the fools that they are.

Reply
27.
You Are the Reason People Hate Christians
June 12, 2015 at 7:45 am #
Im pretty sure the Bible says that having sex out of wedlock is a sin. So if you get divorced, and you
hope to have more children (please dont), youll be sinning in the eyes of God. Plus the Bible
speaks against divorce too? You people sure are smart.
Reply
28.
Rene Kelly (@kellysgal)
June 12, 2015 at 7:19 am #
If your union is that weak, more power to you. The rest of us who have no issue with what other
people do in their lives will continue with our strong and established unions
Reply
29.
Teresa Conrad
June 12, 2015 at 5:40 am #
Gotta say that you are both cutting your noses off to spite your faces. No ones marriage or how
they live their lives has any effect on your marriage and life. Its so refreshing to know that
supposedly good christian people can promote so much hate in the name of their religion. I
truly hope that when you two have children, that those children realize, when they become adults,
that their parents were part of a world-wide promotion of hate. Nice legacy. Enjoy your divorce.
Reply
30.
notquiteelvis
June 12, 2015 at 5:25 am #
Do it. Seriously, do it. I guarantee you that nobody on this good earth will care.
You say youve got kids. I wonder, have they gone through the do what I want or Ill hold my
breath phase? If youre like most parents, your reaction was most likely one of tolerant
amusement, knowing that their tantrum would change precisely nothing.
Now consider the reaction of the rest of the world, which has now discovered you by means of the
magical Internet machine, to your little tantrum. Do you genuinely believe that youll get any
reaction more favorable than tolerant amusement? You can sulk and pout and divorce and stamp
your wee feetsies all you like, it will change precisely nothing.
Really, the only remarkable facet of this sad episode is that you were actually immature enough to
Page 16 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
make this public. Youve just threatened to hold your breath until youre blue in the face, in full
view of (basically) the entire planet. You realize, dont you, that this means you have to follow
through?
So go on. Do it. Nobody will care, and youll change precisely nothing, but at least youll be selfrighteous in the knowledge that you carried out your threat. For whatever thats worth.
Reply
31.
EB
June 12, 2015 at 4:41 am #
Please do divorce, Id hate to see this idiocy spread to any offspring the two of you might produce.
Reply
32.
Brad Salavich
June 12, 2015 at 4:05 am #
Your traditional biblical marriage in Genesis meant that your family would give you to a man you
did not know. (no love there) Abraham had three wives, Solomon had 300, there are about 23
other marriages in the Bible with multiple wives at the same time (not one man, one woman). In
Deuteronomy you had to marry the guy that raped you, he would pay your father 50 shekels for
you. Then there is the whole interfaith and interrace stuff cause the Bible didnt allow them either
(didnt stop you though did it). Have you read the book of Ezra?
I married my husband, in a Church, by an ordained minister (he has a PhD in Divinity btw) and
THEN I registered it with the state. You were married a couple years before me, why have you
waited so long to get your divorce? My marriage its doing just fine, sorry about not inviting you
to the wedding. It was awesome.
Reply
33.
Michael
June 12, 2015 at 3:08 am #
Unlike the other commenters here, I completely understand your position. My grandmother
owned a beautiful painting by an artist who lived in her town, she loved that painting and would sit
for hours looking at it. The artist was later caught interfering with young boys and my grandmother
tearfully burned the painting. When asked why she did it, she said that the beauty of the painting
was tainted and she could no longer have it in her home or heart. Marriage is a religious institution
and I understand that Christians would feel this sacred rite is being tainted. Rather than howl at
them and use easy words like bigot and homophobe, I choose to be tolerant of these peoples
view. They arent imposing their beliefs, they are simply saying they cannot partake if the thing they
see as beautiful (to them) is tainted.
Reply
Page 17 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Emma
June 12, 2015 at 12:41 pm #
Thats actually an interesting take on it, though I find very problematic the idea of comparing
gay couples to child molesters And please dont say Christians feel this way many, if not
most of them, DONT feel this way.
Reply
John
June 13, 2015 at 2:43 am #
I see, I understand, its kind of like how I went to church as a kid and thought heaven was a
neat idea, but once I saw how stupid relgion and the people that believed in it were, I
couldnt bring myself to believe even the good side, no matter how appealing.
Reply
34.
JE
June 12, 2015 at 3:04 am #
Well, okay I guess good luck with all that

Doesnt make a darn bit of sense to the rest of us, but since it doesnt hurt us if you go ahead with
your plan, were not going to stop you.
Reply
35.
Eric Glare
June 12, 2015 at 2:21 am #
I find the argument disingenuous at best or a score in your own goal. Their marriage is not what is
in the Marriage Act 1961, he does not believe in the Act as regulation, and his marriage would
remain after divorce less some extra chat required. Thats his religious freedom to do so.
But he still wants to use this regulation to exclude same-sex people be honest, it is equality for all
LGTBI.
He would deny our religious freedom to marry and he would deny us freedom of our biology of
who we are. All denying us for his freedom I think that is selfish and unethical..
Reply
36.
smokin
June 12, 2015 at 1:54 am #
Well, I guess someone else is redefining marriage. These two are ill informed, and never
Page 18 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
understood the whole concept of marriage.

Reply
37.
Wim Blanken
June 12, 2015 at 1:48 am #
Please divorce and do not make more children as you clearly are not able to bring them up in a
loving way. Awfull. just awfull
Reply
38.
MissD
June 12, 2015 at 1:35 am #
Sounds to me like youre looking for an excuse to get divorced

Reply
39.
Zoe
June 12, 2015 at 1:26 am #
Dear Nick just to let you know I went to one of those private religious institutions that all you
people of faith will have to resort to because your kids will be better served and it was run by
lesbians! Shock horror! And they are women of faith. They do a much better service for the
community than spreading fear and bigotry via a stupid stunt!
Reply
40.
Rocio
June 12, 2015 at 1:17 am #
Dear couple: You just stated you believe marriage is a fundamental order of creation.. and you
are going to get divorced??I mean would that be even physically possible in your imaginary
world? I mean, if its Gods will,, how can you break it!. Are you actually planning to break the
commands of your lord? Who are you trying to piss off here, society or God?.
Reply
41.
Jack Eagle (@eagle_i_jack)
June 12, 2015 at 1:14 am #
Im an Irish guy, married for 14yrs with 3 kids, living in Dublin proud to say I voted Yes in our
recent referendum on same sex marriage. When the same sex marriage was approved and carried
through by the Irish voters the world did not end. The world will continue to get up in the morning
Page 19 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
and work through the day regardless of Australias decision to vote for same sex marriage or not!
Nick Jensen and his wife Sarah should go ahead and get a divorce, but face up to the real reason
for their divorce. What a stupid excuse to use a same sex marriage issue as a smoke screen for a
bad marriage!! Their view is not Christian, Im a practicing catholic and in my view, God is accepting
of all no matter what failings/sins one brings with them. As for divorce here in Ireland it is
relatively recent that divorce was introduced by referendum and again the world did not end on
that occasion either!! Get a life you sad fools!!
Reply
42.
Scott Bradley
June 12, 2015 at 12:11 am #
Its nice of you to think we give a crap.

Reply
43.
FullerR
June 11, 2015 at 11:21 pm #
Greatest tragedy here is that these two idiots were allowed to reproduce. Theres a special place in
hell for the intolerant. Wonder if these two will be married when they get there?
Reply
44.
lbcitygirl
June 11, 2015 at 11:16 pm #
The truth is none of us care about your marriage. Go ahead and get divorced. Because this is
stupid. Your marriage obviously never meant anything to you to begin with.
Reply
45.
Sarah Jones Geer
June 11, 2015 at 11:11 pm #
You know what is the most hilarious about this? Not just that no one will care whether one random
couple gets divorced, not just that they are making a silly little token gesture anyway (since the only
thing theyre actually CHANGING is not getting a tax break), but that for all their touting of what
god hates, they will then be living in sin by cohabitating while unmarried.
Hypocrisy, thy name is religion.
Reply
46.
Page 20 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Jen Beeds
June 11, 2015 at 11:04 pm #
Id take them more seriously if they were willing to light themselves on fire in a public square.
Reply
47.
Diego Garcia
June 11, 2015 at 10:13 pm #
The most dangerous people in this world are religious people. These two are no different than
other religions zealots who want to impose their beliefs on other people.
Obviously this idiot didnt consider the fact that getting divorced is not as simple as saying I dont
like the addition of gay people to the institution of marriage and therefore i want to leave it.
I live in New York City where we have marriage equality and I can assure you society has not
descended into purgatory because of it.
My married gay friends are still sending their kids to school and raising them just like they were
before marriage equality was instituted.
Whats the difference? Now they have the same rights as my wife and I do.
This couple should also look up the separation between church and state. They are the very reason
why we need to uphold this principle more than ever.
Reply
Tfizzle
June 11, 2015 at 11:52 pm #
surely by writing this comment you are trying to impose your beliefs onto others?
Reply
John
June 13, 2015 at 3:01 am #
Its true people will be good and evil regardless of religion, but religion often makes
the evil sound good I guess(people who kill for religous reasons). I dont consider
people preaching atheism bad. Unlike religious preaching where they get a
benefit(more people believe in an imaginary friend, the more real they seem to
become, and you become more good in that imaginary organizations eyes) an
athiest just wants to help you not waste your life for that imaginary friend, they gain
nothing from it except joy that they helped someone much like them, and that is a
really selfless thing to do.
Reply
Michael
June 12, 2015 at 2:59 am #
Page 21 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Really? Religious people are the most dangerous? Stalin was atheist he was responsible for
more soviet murders than the Germans in WW2 Including an estimated 10 million
Ukrainians.. What about Alfred Kinsey, your countryman? Jeffrey dahmer? Jim Jones? North
Korea? Mao? Pol Pot? Please. Just like religion atheism has a great weakness. People. The
hearts of men are desperately wicked and religious men usually fall for one of the three Gs
that ALL men fall for to become evil. Gold, gals (or guys) or glory.
Reply
KSH
June 12, 2015 at 3:51 am #
This is the most idiotic protest against same-sex-marriage I have ever heard!
Reply
48.
Kye
June 11, 2015 at 9:49 pm #
Im pretty sure that you have to be separated for a year to divorce. Exception of anannulment early
on, if that is the case this story is irrelevant.
Reply
49.
Bryonia
June 11, 2015 at 9:34 pm #
Love one another as I have loved you. Wheres the love? Jesus dined with prostitutes and tax
collectors. Would he dine with you Nick and Sarah? Judge not lest you be judged. Etc Etc.
Reply
Andy Falcon
June 12, 2015 at 4:07 am #
They are not judging gay people, they are judging the actions of the state which they
consider contrary to their beliefs. Same way gay folks were before. Gays had their right to
protest, why cant they?
Reply
keiren
June 12, 2015 at 6:13 pm #
You can protest but the idea of having a protest is to void your view and perhaps
Page 22 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
achieve something at the end which clearly has not been the case. Frankly, I think he
could not wait to divorce the poor girl now that Gay marriage is on the table. I would
hire a lawyer if I was her.
Reply
50.
Nat
June 11, 2015 at 8:19 pm #
What a pity two people like this are wasting their lives worrying about what other people do with
their lives. This is by far the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. I cant believe these two have
gone to the media!!!
I married my husband in a catholic ceremony. My husband is catholic but I certainly never label
myself. So the church has allowed me to marry by a catholic priest when I do not follow catholic
beliefs, yet this couple thinks it is all about religion. I married my husband for love.
Times have changed, and thank god! I am so glad religion does not rule how people live anymore,
it only seems to result in war and ridiculous concepts.
This couple need to learn empathy and put themselves in the shoes of others. Homosexual people
dont choose to be homosexual, they are born that way. I would much prefer people to be honest
with who they are. This is difficult when discrimination still exists. I have friends who are gay and I
cant wait to see them marry their sole mate and celebrate their love just as I did with my husband
Reply
51.
Trevor Mobbs
June 11, 2015 at 8:15 pm #
It takes a special kind of hypocrisy to spend your life fighting against the civil recognition of samesex relationships, and then turn around and declare that actually, the civil recognition of your own
relationship is of no value to you.
Reply
52.
boo22
June 11, 2015 at 8:04 pm #
Henny and his wife, Penny.

Reply
53.
Gillian
June 11, 2015 at 6:15 pm #
Page 23 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
If Sarah and Nick Jenson ARE true Christians then when they divorce then they will NOT be able to
live together as that is AGAINST Christianity to live in sin!!! So maybe its just an excuse to get
divorced!!!
Reply
Fiona
June 11, 2015 at 7:18 pm #
i understand that they are simply getting divorced by the state, not their church. Therefore
they are still married under the Christian definition of marriage.
Reply
54.
Travis Morien
June 11, 2015 at 5:44 pm #
Americas Best Christian, Mrs Betty Bowers, gives an excellent explanation of biblical marriage,
citing chapter and verse. If you would like to see what the bible has to say about the topic, watch
her lecture on YouTube. See Betty Bowers Explains Traditional Marriage to Everyone Else. Youll
be glad you did.
Reply
55.
Kate
June 11, 2015 at 5:41 pm #
To the most delusional and uneducated couple in Australia,

Its people like you that make all patient, kind hearted and understanding people want to turn
against their beliefs and start a full blown civil war. You are a complete and utter embarrassment
to Australians and our way of thinking. You should be ashamed that you think this is an acceptable
thing to think this, let along go to the media about in 2015.
Gay marriage has NOTHING to do with you! Get that into your head. Its not about your religion.
Its simply not about YOU.
Its about those who want to express their love and live a happy life with the one they choose.
Get an absolute grip of your lives Jensens and welcome to 2015 where no one give a shit about
what people like you think.
Regards,
Everybody who is normal
Reply
Page 24 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
56.
T. Johnson
June 11, 2015 at 4:09 pm #
Dear Couple: Since you two are being so deliberate the choices you are making to fulfill your
beliefs, then you should follow this tenet through to its logical conclusion
You had better quit attending churchbecause there are some churches that are inclusive and
welcoming to all people. You MUST take your stand against them by leaving
You had also better quit your jobs. There are any number of government and private employers
who extend benefits to homosexuals and sometimes, even to their same-sex partners. It would
only be prudent to register your dissatisfaction with this state of affairs by leaving your
employment
Ultimatelyalthough I would never encourage anyone to kill themselvesyou might need to do just
thatas there MANY towns, cities, municipalities, counties, states, and yes, countries that
recognize the inherent civil and human rights of their gay citizenry. Intentionally ending your
connection to the lifeforce which has been extended to include homosexuals would be pretty
convincing proof of your undying faith, wouldnt it?
Whether or not you decide to carry through on any of these faithful acts, however, please *do* get
divorced. Its your right.
And, while Im not a gay baker, I am gay and I do bake sometimes. Even though youre straight, I
will be happy to make your divorce cakejust as I would for any couple that wants to get divorced. I
dont discriminate.
Reply
57.
Bree
June 11, 2015 at 3:18 pm #
Talk about cutting your nose off to spite your own face! What a cynical, ill informed and
uneducated pair these two are. Please do get divorced (good luck trying to get through the courts
with that reason for one) because I would quite happy of hundreds of gays marry than have one
toxic couple stay together. People should love who they want to love, be with there partner for life
and have that piece of paper if they want it. Why are you allowed to judge them?! So glad Im not
religious and dont have my life my obscured by such idiotic beliefs.
Reply
58.
Go to Hell
June 11, 2015 at 2:21 pm #
Yeah I hope you do divorce and never breed again, its a shame you have children now.
Reply
Page 25 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
59.
Liam
June 11, 2015 at 2:20 pm #
Good on the CityNews for publishing this article. If nothing else its a wonderfully cynical exercise
in self-promotion for the title and in keeping with the authors apparent motives.
As for commenting on the content of the article, Trev and Margaret have highlighted the two most
glaring holes in this piece of Swiss cheese. That is, the argument for state involvement in marriage
happened long ago and the couple in question wont meet the legal requirements for divorce.
Well, unless the penny finally drops for Mrs Jensen and she walks out. Although, shes presumably
as wrapped up in this cynical stunt as Mr Jensen. Of course, Im making the foolish assumption that
Mr Jensen allows Mrs Jensen to form her own opinions.
I respect Jensens right to hold what can only be described as bigoted and ignorant views, but I
hold no respect at all for his proposed actions or intolerance.
Community standards and expectations change, and have done so for all of time, egotistical fools
remain constant.
Reply
60.
George
June 11, 2015 at 2:17 pm #
Aww, such loving couple I wonder what Jesus himself would do if he could see what people have
made of his teachings of love and compassion. Just like the Catholic Church pointing its big finger
against gay rights yet playing a blind eye on its absurd hierarchy of wealth (while others die of
hunger) and all their scandals with pedofilia. Jesus would be proud!!!
Reply
61.
Ellie Abbott-Grasso
June 11, 2015 at 2:07 pm #
By this bizarre logic, since we arent following the bible and stoning gay people to death, Nick and
Sarah here should have jumped off a bridge in protest ages ago.
Reply
62.
Lozza
June 11, 2015 at 1:47 pm #
I dont understand your logic or you belief system here. Does not the bible say, Judge not, that ye
be not judged? Matthew 7:1-3King James Version (KJV)
It continues I believe with For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what
Page 26 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in
thy brothers eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
To my eye, it seems that you have chosen to use a religious belief to justify & broadcast your own
bigoted righteousness (certainly not the Bibles teachings).
I question too, your intention to go back to living in sin by not being married. So you are turning
to sin to object to another sin.
If there is a god may he have mercy on your souls
Reply
63.
Cranston
June 11, 2015 at 12:48 pm #
Marriage is the union of a man and a woman. Just like Abraham oops!, Isaac darn!, Jacob
shoot!, Moses nope!, David not quite!, Solomon missed by that much!
Moreover, does this muppet actually discuss his marital status at Saturday sport? Must make for
some exciting conversations. He probably notices lots of people who just remembered theyve left
something in their car.
Reply
Cris
June 11, 2015 at 10:24 pm #
Good points. Biblical marriage includes forced marriage to slaves, polygamy, concubines &
wives, forced marriage of girls to their rapists,etc.
Reply
64.
Sean O'Neill (@CInclusiveWorld)
June 11, 2015 at 12:04 pm #
Obviously he doesnt love her, its just another good result of marriage equality. As for the Jensens
attitude to this, haters are gonna hate.
Reply
65.
PWyns
June 11, 2015 at 11:52 am #
Hello,
Great article. Recently Elton John wanted his gay lover recorded on the birth certificate as the
mother. I suppose Kim Kardashian will have to change her birth certificate as she now has two
mothers. When I now tell someone that I am married I will henceforth stress that my wife (not
partner) is actually a woman! What a brave new world. What a lovely social experiment. Let us
overturn the wisdom and traditions of the ages. Judgement day is coming and it will not be the
terminator sequel.
Page 27 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Reply
sk
June 11, 2015 at 2:03 pm #
I know youre trying to be clever, but Kim Kardashian is not Caitlyn Jenners kid. Hence the
name Kardashian. Because he fathers last name was Kardashian. You know, the famous
American lawyer. But dont worry about it, hold tight for judgment, Im sure that God will be
super proud that you spent your time casting judgment on others and presuming to know
what right and wrong were based on your tiny little mind.
Reply
66.
Chareen
June 11, 2015 at 11:17 am #
Also, I understand that some people are annoyed at this paper for publishing this story but the
sad fact is there are a lot of people who share this ignorant view about homosexuality. Isnt it
better to expose these beliefs through such forms of media so that these discussions can take
place?
Maybe enough alienation for such views will help these mindless muppets to re-evaluate their
beliefs I hope so.
Reply
67.
Chareen
June 11, 2015 at 11:13 am #
While the bible does mention marriage, Abrahamic religion is not responsible for the origin of
marriage which is evident in other cultures preceding it (such as the Pagan Egyptians from at least
500BC). Marriage just like religion is entirely contrived by men, and continues to change at the
whim of man. You are not married now as ancient Christian tradition would advise, yet use that
tradition like a shield behind which you hide and hurl bigotry and your own simple-minded hangups.
Homosexuality is natural, found extensively throughout nature. Homophobia is a human (and
largely religious) invention. That you are so offended by what other people do in their bedrooms
(let alone think that a god would care) speaks volumes about your inability to think critically.
Egocentrics at their finest. No intelligent person cares if you get a divorce you are insignificant.
Reply
68.
Alison
June 11, 2015 at 10:02 am #
I am so glad that you are getting a divorce so you will fully understand what it is like to be in a
Page 28 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
relationship rather than a marriage by law, which gay and lesbian people face every day. Say
goodbye to joint health insurance or a joint retirement plan and even a house in both your names.
But Im just wondering, when you get divorced (in the eyes of God) is God just like a third party and
will be expecting a third of all their worldly possessions? Like any other divorce?
Reply
69.
Sway
June 11, 2015 at 9:42 am #
The fact that this article exists at the same time scientists are slamming particles together in the
large hadron collider is hilarious.
Reply
Shea Mikkelsen
June 11, 2015 at 3:23 pm #
This is the greatest comment for this topic. Its depressing that this is even still a debate. We
have come so far in science, but when you look at the whole picture, we are still so very
primitive as a species.
Reply
70.
Patrick
June 11, 2015 at 9:35 am #
why dont we go the way of other countries where you can get married in a church/temple/mosque
or other holy place before your own god, whoever that may be OR you can get married at a
Registry Office OR you can do both. When we were married the Church acted as ex officio
Government employees and completed the Civil requirements after the Church requirements.
Separate the two and then people can have the choice of one, the other or both. The hang up
would then be only about the word Marriage.
Reply
Eric Glare
June 12, 2015 at 2:44 am #
Patrick all that is available here and there are thousands of churches registered to marry,
plus celebrants who can go anywhere. Marriage has been diverse for a very long time.
Reply
71.
Milan J
Page 29 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
June 10, 2015 at 9:49 pm #
I am absolutely disgusted that you placed these two morons on your cover. I cannot believe that
such ugly and selfish individuals exist in our society.
Reply
72.
BFH
June 10, 2015 at 9:15 pm #
This article is riddled with inaccuracies and internal inconsistencies. The Lachlan Macquarie
Internship (not institute, which doesnt appear to exist) has no place in public policy if this is the
kind of poorly researched material you produce.
Reply
73.
Elise
June 10, 2015 at 8:47 pm #
Haha get divorced then losers. Bring on the gay weddings!

Reply
R. Russ
June 12, 2015 at 2:20 am #
HOWLING!!!!!
Reply
74.
Cherelyn
June 10, 2015 at 7:52 pm #
This is seriously the dumbest thing Ive read in quite some time.
Or possible the funniest. I really hope this was a satirical piece of writing.
If not then your recruitment team should take a hard look in the mirror.
Reply
75.
John
June 10, 2015 at 6:50 pm #
Hey CityNews which side of history do you want to be on?
Page 30 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Its called equality maybe you could do a story on it someday. Rather than reporting some stupid
one sided story about people supporting inequality and oppression.
Reply
76.
Lauren
June 10, 2015 at 6:05 pm #
Disgusted that this article was printed. People are saying, Shouldnt they have their opinion
expressed, too? Well, no. Nothing hateful should be printed. Why cant christians make an
argument for traditional marriage without resorting to these petty stunts and invalid points??
Reply
77.
Candace Jade Sabrina Garside
June 10, 2015 at 5:44 pm #
Divorce then. You have just proved The Sanctity Of Marriage means absolutely NOTHING except
a ploy by religious Zealots to deny people their human rights.
Talk about Ignorant white trash attempting to guilt others.
If you read between the lines,
They are Divorcing so they can both pursue relationships previously denied to them. They just
dont want to come out of the closet and openly say that.
Maybe they should remember that ONLY God has the right to judge anyone! And ONLY God can
PASS JUDGEMENT. They have just proved that they are sinners, and doing the work of the devil. If
anyone actually believes that toilet paper called the bible.
When you are perfect, and without SIN, then you can pass judgement on others. Until then, shut
up and let others live how they want. After all, you dont really have ANY clue what is right or
wrong. And this story proves that these 2 crack pots dont even have morals.
Reply
78.
Trev
June 10, 2015 at 5:24 pm #
Marriage is the union of a man and a woman before a community in the sight of God
Any attempt to change the definition of marriage by law is not something in which we are able to
partake.
The government has already changed the definition in 2004 to be Marriage means the union of a
man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life. which omits any
mention of God and already allows Civil unions to be considered marriage.
If your issue is with you belief Governments shouldnt be allowed to change the meaning of words
Page 31 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
surely you should already be filing for divorce? Dont be a hypocrite on us Nick.
Reply
79.
Kate
June 10, 2015 at 5:07 pm #
Why has Christianity become so much about hatred and exclusion? Im pretty sure that isnt what
Jesus intended. For the record, this guy used to throw parties when he was a teenager whenever
his parents were away and let hundreds of people destroy his parents house, furniture, and
swimming pool, hes a complete scumbag. Now he tries to twist the words of a prophet of love and
peace to spread bigotry and hatred. Christians need to rewind and think what would Jesus do?
instead of spreading this venom.
Children kill themselves rather than deal with being gay because of the stigma that nasty people
like this so fervently seek to perpetuate. They make me sick.
Im an atheist and Im more in touch with a life in the image of Christ than these homophobic hatemongers.
Reply
80.
Tim
June 10, 2015 at 5:00 pm #
Should Change the Tag line to Well Stupid, Well done. You would thing better from a paper in the
nations capital. Bad Grammar and reporting. Christians have become the Nazis of the 21st
century.
Reply
81.
Margaret
June 10, 2015 at 4:58 pm #
How will they meet the legislative requirements for divorce???

Reply
Richard
June 10, 2015 at 5:57 pm #
Margaret, you raise a very valid point because to make an application for divorce they need
to swear that they have lived separately and apart for greater than one year and cite
irreconcilable differences. This is a silly publicity stunt because my question to this rightous
couple is how do your ethics stand with lying which is what you would have to do to carry
out this silly protest. At the end of the day, you will have gone to the expense of attempting
to divorce and failing, or lying and succeeding and who on earth actually cares. You have the
right to your beliefs, but what you propose is simply hateful and I would have though in
conflict with basic christian ethics.
Page 32 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Reply
Bron
June 11, 2015 at 4:10 pm #
It would be great when they change these outdated laws and allow anyone to marry, and
then this idiot (Mr Jensen) will apply for a divorce and be denied. Now he will understand the
heartache people have been suffering for decades.
Wouldnt that be karma at its best.
Reply
82.
John Moulis
June 10, 2015 at 4:20 pm #
There is no mention of marriage in the Bible. It began as a secular institution by Man but was
hijacked by the churches who injected religion into the marriage vows. Christians and others
involved with religion have no right to claim that marriage is a holy union owned by the churches
and have no right to force their opinions on the subject onto anybody else.
Reply
Isaac
June 10, 2015 at 5:13 pm #
I think you need to read the bible a bit more, refer to Hebrews 13:4 instead of ignorantly
talking.
Reply
giverson
June 11, 2015 at 11:56 am #
I think the point that John was trying to make was that marriage existed in one form
or another before Christianity was around and he is correct. Even your example is
from the Old Testament way before the Christ supposedly walked this earth. And if
you are going to follow the Old Testament, then you also need to follow the
requirements contained in chapters such as Leviticus which i can be almost 100%
sure that you dont. And further, within the Old Testament polygamy, incest and other
distasteful forms of marriage are allowed is this the definition of the institution that
you wish to revert to?
Next time, instead of a knee jerked, cherry picked reaction actually think about what
you say before you put the post online.
Reply
Page 33 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Eric Glare
June 12, 2015 at 3:01 pm #
Whichever way you look at it, correcting Johns mistakes and even maximising
the religious aspect for benefit of doubt, it still remains the Biblical lineage plus
that of several mainstream churches that have been bullies on religious
freedom. None of these lineages map direct or completely to Australian society
which has many other strands of heritage including Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism,
Taoism and Indigenous Dreaming Judeo-Christianity just over-dominates the
law.
Jensen is all about continuing colonial religious dispossession insisting on their
religious supremacy. Harking after our shameful past of discrimination.
We really live with lies and hypocrisy on religious freedom:
Section 116 states that The Commonwealth shall not make any law for
establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for
prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be
required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the
Commonwealth.
I just want the same religious freedom as the Jensens have. Unfortunately the
marriage equality lobby is too gutless and immoral to make a stand on religious
freedom and are content for our biology to be pitched against their religion
only.
Reply
Amanda Kendal
June 11, 2015 at 11:59 pm #
I think we should still be able to kill our neighbour if they work on the Sabbath too.
And, as the great sky pixie ordained, if youre not prepared to rape your newlywidowed sister-in-law when the same sky pixie orders it, you should die.
Oh, and dont forget that the sky pixie doesnt mind rape at all: quite apart from not
telling Mary before getting her pregnant rape, in most peoples book he also didnt
think that Lot being prepared to offer his teenage daughters to be gang raped in order
to distract some men from other men was a bad thing. Lot remained the one good
man worth saving although his wife was killed by the sky pixie just for looking back
(which is far, far worse that rape. Obviously).
These two probably dont think that these things would be acceptable today theyd
squirm and wriggle to try to claim that their sky pixies wasnt a bit of a sh*t in carrying
on like this but it illustrates their pix n mix nature of their religious beliefs (as with
every other religious person) and thus their hypocrisy.
And possibly yours too.
Reply
Page 34 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Stanza Matic
June 12, 2015 at 9:38 pm #
I am a Christian who supports gay marriage, and I think the people in the article
are horribly misguided.
Just to correct you though, Mary consents to become pregnant: Luke 1:26-38.
And the Old Testament needs to be *interpreted* in the light of Christs
example. He put aside many traditional beliefs, not least in regard to women.
I think that these two are a little too fond of certain parts of Leviticus. Their
views are both sad and bigoted.
Reply
83.
Bill McAllister
June 10, 2015 at 4:11 pm #
Yep, You are an ill informed tosser. READ YOUR NEW TESTAMENT !!!!!!!! . See what Jesus had to
say about homosexuality !!! absolutely nothing.
Idiot
Reply
84.
Justin
June 10, 2015 at 4:06 pm #
Would have been nice for Nick to outline the Institutes / internship programs links to the
fundamentalist group the Australian Christian Lobby as part of his bio, or at least your
responsibility to do so City News.
Reply
85.
Jacob Kelly
June 10, 2015 at 4:06 pm #
Well, you are brave to write an article and publish something like this
. this still doesnt change the fact that your deluded bigots.
Reply
86.
Jess
June 10, 2015 at 3:46 pm #
Page 35 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
This is the most bigoted load of bull I have ever read in my life. I am ashamed that people like this
live in my generally progressive city. My aunt and her partner have been together for 24 years and
have lovingly raised a smart, kind boy who is now 13 and is one of the happiest children I know. No
one has the right to tell them that their love means any less than any one elses love.
As the saying goes, if you dont like gay marriage. Dont get gay married.
Reply
87.
Nik
June 10, 2015 at 3:14 pm #
First, you yourself say that marriage is an organic institution, one recognised through culture (prior
to religion), having evolved through time to what it is today. is that not what is occurring now? A
simple evolution in the definition. Second, I disagree with your statement that if changed, in future,
It will not be about building and securing communities into the future. That is precisely what a
new definition seeks to do. There is a very large number of same sex couples who provide love,
solidarity and model Christianity in their communities. Lastly, with high divorce rates (lower among
same sex couples, btw) and Married at First Sight the sacredness of marriage is already
diminished. Some may choose to discriminate. However, many celebrants, priests and reverends
recognise that love is love is love. 1 Corinthians 13:4-7.
Reply
88.
Ericka
June 10, 2015 at 2:52 pm #
I cant believe that a pair of avowed Christians would want to go against their religions rules and
live in sin rather than allow acceptance and equality for all gods children.
I am very proud of myself for reading this article all the way through before confirming my facevalue conclusion that it is ridiculous.
Reply
89.
Jim
June 10, 2015 at 2:24 pm #
The fundamental order of creation was around before religion, laws, and even marriage. Im
pretty sure of thisunless Im holding my timeline upside down?
Come on CityNewsI didnt think one small minded couples views were worth spreading?kinda
shock media to a point?
Reply
90.
Sara
June 10, 2015 at 1:37 pm #
Page 36 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Im most concerned by this Nick Jensen is the director of the Lachlan Macquarie Institute, which
helps develop leaders in public policy (lmi.org.au).
What business does he have developing leaders when he cant use proper grammar or logic? Note
to self, do not engage with LMI folks.
Reply
91.
Sam
June 10, 2015 at 1:23 pm #
Why the Citynews thought one couples narrow-minded hate-filled opinion piece is a news item in
2015 is beyond me. Who cares if they get divorced what two people do in their own relationship is
their own business.. So go about yours quietly Nick and Sarah because those of us living in 2015
dont care for your bigotry.
Reply
92.
Tim
June 10, 2015 at 12:18 pm #
YOU cant get married because MY religion says so.

What a nasty and heartless approach.
Reply
93.
Kara
June 10, 2015 at 12:08 pm #
There is so much wrong with this article I dont even know where to start.
Reply
FGC
June 10, 2015 at 3:43 pm #
Start with the grammar and work your way up.

Reply
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
1. Meet The Couple Who Will Get Divorced If Marriage Equality Becomes Legal - Ice Trend - June 14, 2015
[] Writing for CityNews , Nick said marriage is part of Gods intimate story for human history. []
2. Meet The Couple Who Will Get Divorced If Marriage Equality Becomes Legal CauseHub - June 13, 2015
Page 37 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
[] Writing for CityNews, Nick said marriage is part of God's intimate story for human history. []
3. Nick Jensen, Same-Sex Marriage, and Public Faith | Whispering Jack - June 12, 2015
[] wasnt going to say anything about the recent furore surrounding Canberra couple Nick and Sarah Jensens
plans to divorce if same-sex marriage is introduced in Australia, but I think its worth noting a few points. (If you
havent read the article yet, I []
4. State view won't change marriage in eyes of a man and woman's God | Em News - June 12, 2015
[] latest protest against legalising same-sex marriage was publicised in an article by Nick Jensen, director of the
Lachlan Macquarie Institute and former ACT director of the []
Leave a Reply
Enter your comment here...
Leave your opinion here. Please be nice. Your Email address will be kept private.
Related News
News
Curtin pub robbed at knifepoint
June 13, 2015
News
Page 38 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Shotgun robbery at the Mawson Club

June 13, 2015
News
Captain Cook Memorial Jet out of commission, again
June 12, 2015
ACT Election 2012

Thanks for standing
by Michael Moore
As the new Assemblys winners are grinners, MICHAEL MOORE says we owe a vote of thanks to all the
elections candidates. Like this:Like Loading
Share this:
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Tumblr
More
Like this:
Like
Be the first to like this.
Page 39 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
ACT Labor returned to power

by CityNews
ACT LABOR has secured another four years in office after Greens MLA Shane Rattenbury announced his
decision to support Katy Gallagher and the Party to form Government, ending a week of negotiations.
Rattenbury signed a Parliamentary Agreement with the ALP today, which includes a comprehensive list of
policies, initiatives and reforms to be implemented over []
Share this:
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Tumblr
More
Like this:
Like
Final election results announced

by CityNews
ACT Electoral Commissioner Phil Green today announced the candidates to be elected to the Assembly
and represent Canberras three electorates. Candidates to be elected, in the order in which they were
successful in the count, are: Brindabella Zed Seselja Joy Burch Brendan Smyth Mick Gentleman Andrew
Wall Ginninderra Alistair Coe Vicki Dunne Mary Porter Chris Bourke Yvette Berry []
Share this:
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Tumblr
More
Page 40 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Like this:
Like
Columnists
Catherine Carter
Carter / Bring on the wrecking ball!
Cedric Bryant
Gardening / Gold medals for the Gallipoli rose
Don Aitkin
Aitkin / We cant escape the role of coal
Helen Musa
Winning photo portrait shows 'bold character'
View all Authors
About us
Contact us
Advertise with us
Letters to the Editor
Competitions
Subscribe: RSS
Search...
Get social
Connect with CityNews
Page 41 of 42
2015-06-13, 10:21 PM
Popular
Latest
Comments
Gay law change may force us to divorce June 10, 2015
Bad news for the Jensens divorce plans June 12, 2015
Jensen divorce protest / Its time, says brother June 11, 2015
Copyright 1993- 2015 Canberra CityNews. All Rights Reserved.
Page 42 of 42

Gay Law Change May Force Us To Divorce - Canberra CityNews

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Gay Law Change May Force Us To Divorce - Canberra CityNews

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Gay law change may force us to divorce - Canberra CityNews