Marriage equality debate - The plebiscite is on its way. (Cont in Pt 3)

[Maggie5]

When Brandis talks about it neglects to numerate the list of exceptions.
Can understand exemptions on the grounds of religion to not perform a marriage ceremony but Civil Celebrants?
Don't think that Lionel Murphy had this in mind when he introduced them.
Right decision by Labor, decision should be made by parliament as it would be a waste of money considering exemptions and the fact whatever the outcome is non binding.
In before some supporters say that the current government took the policy to an election, they also took policies on super and backpackers tax and have since back flipped on those so it is not an excuse. Policies taken to an election are just something they can change if the right wingers whinge enough, so why not this one?

 

[Scotland]

Shouldn't any marriage celebrant be able to decide who they do and don't want to marry?

 

[Forward Press]

Adam Bandt should introduce a private member's bill on marriage equality and see how much traction it gets.

 

[pazza]

I'd go one step further.

Is there anything stopping Shorten from writing a letter to the G-G to organise a joint sitting of the parliament to get this sorted out once and for all?

 

[Maggie5]

Adam Bandt should introduce a private member's bill on marriage equality and see how much traction it gets.

I thought that had been tried by someone in the Senate and didn't get through the lower house?
Not sure that Adam would have a better chance as would still need the numbers.

 

[Showbags]

Lyle Shelton was the most horrific little vermin on 4 Corners last night (well no more than usual).

He kept trying to link SSM with children.
He lacks the ability to differentiate between the two issues.

Can any of the other braindead conservatives that frequent this forum please explain how amending the marriage act will affect the children of gay couples?

 

[Maggie5]

I'd go one step further.

Is there anything stopping Shorten from writing a letter to the G-G to organise a joint sitting of the parliament to get this sorted out once and for all?

Good idea but not sure whether the opposition can do this, interesting though.

 

[Scotland]

Can any of the other braindead conservatives that frequent this forum please explain how amending the marriage act will affect the children of gay couples?

I really don't get this argument. If you have issue with same sex parenting then that's your prerogative, but will SSM really have any effect on that at all?

Same sex couples can already adopt, use IVF (unsure on Medicare status given simply wanting to reproduce isn't a medical problem) etc.

'I'm Tom, this is my partner Dave and our son Toby'
'I'm Tom, this is my husband Dave and our son Toby'

That's really all that changes as far as kids go I'd have thought. Odd thing to be fixated on.

 

[Showbags]

I really don't get this argument. If you have issue with same sex parenting then that's your prerogative, but will SSM really have any effect on that at all?

Same sex couples can already adopt, use IVF (unsure on Medicare status given simply wanting to reproduce isn't a medical problem) etc.

'I'm Tom, this is my partner Dave and our son Toby'
'I'm Tom, this is my husband Dave and our son Toby'

That's really all that changes as far as kids go I'd have thought. Odd thing to be fixated on.

If they wanted to be consistent about caring for children, theyd simply oppose SS adoption and support SS marriage.

While i personally have no problem with SS adoption, im not across the scientific consensus on the effect on children. Maybe a scientific argument exists why children shouldnt be raised by two parents of the same sex.

But they are a bunch of cowards, cloaking their bigotry behind this rubbish argument about kids.

Eric Abetz was funny on 4 Corners, he went to great lengths to point out one of his staffers is gay (though he only came out after he got a job with him, no chance of him being hired if Abetz knew he was a NTTAWWT beforehand). You could tangibly see the distaste oozing from Abetz face during the interview.

 

[Scotland]

You can oppose same sex adoption all you want but it's already law, so not really in the same boat as SSM. Dilly dallying and playing politics with SSM is one thing, removing the existing rights of same sex parents would be a whole new political battle.

 

[Pie eyed]

Turnbull fail.
Next dim idea you loopy knut.

 

[The Edukator]

Ns if discussed previously but now ssm will be delayed even longer and allows people to speak more ill of it. The topic will continue to fester.

Is this not just as bad and would the ends not have justified the means(plebiscite)?

Personally I just always thought it was the pragmatic approach

 

[cartwright]

Ns if discussed previously but now ssm will be delayed even longer and allows people to speak more ill of it. The topic will continue to fester.

Is this not just as bad and would the ends not have justified the means(plebiscite)?

Personally I just always thought it was the pragmatic approach

Pragmatic?

People like Christensen and Bernardi, have already shown how they'll speak about marriage equality, regardless.

The liberals can try to pretend they "tried" as much as they like. They stacked the party room to come up with this pop vote, they're playing politics with the rights of others, and eventually it'll come back to hurt them.

the people who this actually affects didn't want the rest of us voting on their lives. How demeaning.


Oh, and as an aside, why are the nationals not listening to those in their electorates?!?

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...cite-on-samesex-marriage-20160201-gminy0.html

 

[igon value]

The liberals can try to pretend they "tried" as much as they like. They stacked the party room to come up with this pop vote, they're playing politics with the rights of others, and eventually it'll come back to hurt them.

Will it?

the people who this actually affects didn't want the rest of us voting on their lives. How demeaning.

How is it anymore demeaning than politicians doing the same? How is it demeaning at all?

 

[cartwright]

Will it?


How is it anymore demeaning than politicians doing the same? How is it demeaning at all?

Err because that's the only way to change the marriage act?

 

[igon value]

Err because that's the only way to change the marriage act?

That doesn't make it demeaning

 

[Gough]

We'll keep talking about it, the government will continue to look out of touch, and when they lose power in two years time SSM will be legislated for appropriately. Simples.

 

[igon value]

We'll keep talking about it, the government will continue to look out of touch, and when they lose power in two years time SSM will be legislated for appropriately. Simples.

Yeah like how the Liberals lost the election after the deeply unpopular Iraq War. Oh wait.

This issue barely moves the needle for why people vote.

 

[Gough]

Even if they win the next election ssm will come about through parliamentary vote then. It's a matter of when not if now, the debate is over.

 

[igon value]

Even if they win the next election ssm will come about through parliamentary vote then. It's a matter of when not if now.

Why would it?

I thought we'd get another go at the Republic, but in the 20 years since we've gone backwards, electing a bloke that brought back knights and dames.

We've gone backwards since the Pacific solution too.

No guarantees.

 

[Gough]

In three years time ssm will be legal in Australia, and people will be wondering what all this fuss was about. Of that I am very confident.

 

[igon value]

In three years time ssm will be legal in Australia, and people will be wondering what all this fuss was about. Of that I am very confident.

Will it? How will it be legal?

 

[Gough]

Whichever party wins the next election will hold a free vote in the Parliament to legalise it. The situation in Australia where it has broad support but is being held hostage by the conservatives in the Liberal Party is no longer tenable. Around 85% of gay Australians didn't support a plebiscite, we just want MPs to do their bloody jobs.

 

[Father Jack]

It will give the new government a brilliant launching pad when they get to pass such a popular measure, hopefully they will use the goodwill a bit better than the last time they got such a present when Howard refused to do the Apology for no reason except to pander to good old conservative prejudice

 

[Sainteric]

Why would it?

I thought we'd get another go at the Republic, but in the 20 years since we've gone backwards, electing a bloke that brought back knights and dames.

We've gone backwards since the Pacific solution too.

No guarantees.

Exactly thats why lyle shenton thanked shorten for stopping the vote. The Australian public is fickle the republic should have been easy but here we are still with a British Head of state. Every chance the Gay Marriage issue will go the same way. No one is going to win an election on gay marriage of for that matter the enviroment or aboriginal rights.