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

[Gough]

How on earth is he a second class citizen? Now the personal insult makes perfect sense

This is one of those cases where there is a right, and wrong. You're wrong, bad luck.

 

[Father Jack]

Everything eventually spirals to something more obscene. For your information I couldn't care less if gays want to be in a union. Just call it something other than marriage. Imagine if we started using the word rape to also explain consensual sex.

Well then let's just ban everything.

 

[Taylor]

Let's get this vote done so we can get an 80% positive return rate and never again need to speak about equality.

Each side feels they are the silent majority, end it. Bring it into the light. Let's see what we are dealing with.

Wrap up your vulnerable friends in love, laugh at pathetic attempts to demonize their relationships in advertising, then vote.

Then it's over. Properly over and they can think of another social issue to distract us from to avoid talking about corporate tax avoidance.

 

[RupieDupie]

This is borderline insanity.

Why?

Except for the femto second part, it is a realistic Sesame Street scenario, and as a bonus it demonstrates the type of problem solving skills our government possesses when it comes to solving a similar issue. I would have thought the problem was an easy fix. Our government is planning on spending ~$100 million tax payer money to solve it. Sesame Street - 1 Australian Government - 0

 

[Forward Press]

Let's get this vote done so we can get an 80% positive return rate and never again need to speak about equality.

Each side feels they are the silent majority, end it. Bring it into the light. Let's see what we are dealing with.

Wrap up your vulnerable friends in love, laugh at pathetic attempts to demonize their relationships in advertising, then vote.

Then it's over. Properly over and they can think of another social issue to distract us from to avoid talking about corporate tax avoidance.

Unfortunately that is not how it will play out. A yes vote will result in the Libs saying it's not that high priority and find ways to stall, hoping we'd forget about it. After all, this is a mere plebiscite, not a referendum - it is not legally binding and there is no guarantee of any amendment to the Marriage Act, or even if/when that will happen.

 

[strung_out7]

You are saying his marriage is not the same as a marriage for a heterosexual couple.

If you cannot see this then I have no hope for you.

No hope? How on earth has society lasted this long. The countless generations before us were all just no hopers

 

[Gough]

Let's get this vote done so we can get an 80% positive return rate and never again need to speak about equality.

Each side feels they are the silent majority, end it. Bring it into the light. Let's see what we are dealing with.

Wrap up your vulnerable friends in love, laugh at pathetic attempts to demonize their relationships in advertising, then vote.

Then it's over. Properly over and they can think of another social issue to distract us from to avoid talking about corporate tax avoidance.

It's a matter of principle to me. The Marriage Act was changed to specifically prevent SSM by act of Parliament, it can be amended the same way again to allow it.

 

[sherb]

Unfortunately that is not how it will play out. A yes vote will result in the Libs saying it's not that high priority and find ways to stall, hoping we'd forget about it. After all, this is a mere plebiscite, not a referendum - it is not legally binding and there is no guarantee of any amendment to the Marriage Act, or even if/when that will happen.

Yep, this ALL about the fruit loops on the conservative side stalling and delaying this as much as possible.

 

[Forward Press]

Yep, this ALL about the fruit loops on the conservative side stalling and delaying this as much as possible.

"We promised a plebiscite, but we didn't promise to follow the results of the plebiscite!"

 

[Taylor]

Unfortunately that is not how it will play out. A yes vote will result in the Libs saying it's not that high priority and find ways to stall, hoping we'd forget about it. After all, this is a mere plebiscite, not a referendum - it is not legally binding and there is no guarantee of any amendment to the Marriage Act, or even if/when that will happen.

The issue is already being used to stall, so I agree with you in that.

But it isn't even about the law, it's knowing that the nation is behind you that is a bigger win. It's like the big battle that seals the fate of the war. Once the army of the dead sweep through Minas Tirith and wipe them out, it's done. It's not over, but it's done. It's won.

I intentionally chose that movie because of how long it took to end.

 

[sherb]

No hope? How on earth has society lasted this long. The countless generations before us were all just no hopers

We lasted generations generations without all manner of things.

Society evolves in case you hadn't noticed.

 

[strung_out7]

We lasted generations generations without all manner of things.

Society evolves in case you hadn't noticed.

And unfortunate this generation is devolving quite rapidly

 

[sherb]

It's a matter of principle to me. The Marriage Act was changed to specifically prevent SSM by act of Parliament, it can be amended the same way again to allow it.

It's about cost too.

This is the party of "debt and deficit disaster", "budget repair", etc and yet they are prepared to blow all this money on a glorified opinion poll?

What utter hypocrites.

 

[Taylor]

It's a matter of principle to me. The Marriage Act was changed to specifically prevent SSM by act of Parliament, it can be amended the same way again to allow it.

I've never felt protected by the law from bad people doing bad things, but knowing most people are good and want to live their life the way I do gives me great comfort.

So I don't particularly care about the marriage act being changed, that's a symptom. I want to know that most people I look at will treat me the same as anyone else, I think that's more valuable. The rest will fall into line.

 

[Taylor]

It's about cost too.

This is the party of "debt and deficit disaster", "budget repair", etc and yet they are prepared to blow all this money on a glorified opinion poll?

What utter hypocrites.

I think changing the law before having the weight of a national vote behind it will empower the vocal anti-equality group into feeling they are downtrodden and unheared, but a vote completely crushing their position will forever wipe their relevance out.

It will also make a lot of same sex activists unemployed, but I can live with that. They can move onto the next issue.

 

[strung_out7]

This is one of those cases where there is a right, and wrong. You're wrong, bad luck.

200 pages on a football forum would suggest quite a few people must be wrong.

 

[Taylor]

200 pages on a football forum would suggest quite a few people must be wrong.

If the vote came back that those opposed were in a genuine minority, would you accept it?

 

[Gough]

I think changing the law before having the weight of a national vote behind it will empower the vocal anti-equality group into feeling they are downtrodden and unheared, but a vote completely crushing their position will forever wipe their relevance out.

It will also make a lot of same sex activists unemployed, but I can live with that. They can move onto the next issue.

The anti vote can f***ing lump it. There are plenty of laws I don't agree with, and have no say over.

200 pages on a football forum would suggest quite a few people must be wrong.

Indeed they are.

 

[Taylor]

The anti vote can f***ing lump it. There are plenty of laws I don't agree with, and have no say over.

I'm not going to pretend we have anything like similar circumstances, so I think my position is much softer on it than yours.

 

[sherb]

I think changing the law before having the weight of a national vote behind it will empower the vocal anti-equality group into feeling they are downtrodden and unheared, but a vote completely crushing their position will forever wipe their relevance out.

It will also make a lot of same sex activists unemployed, but I can live with that. They can move onto the next issue.

This issue is no more or less important than any other which hasn't seen a plebiscite in this nation.

In fact, I think this would be the first national plebiscite since the national anthem about 40 years ago.

A plebiscite is just not needed. At all.

 

[Taylor]

This issue is no more or less important than any other which hasn't seen a plebiscite in this nation.

In fact, I think this would be the first national plebiscite since the national anthem about 40 years ago.

A plebiscite is just not needed. At all.

There are people who will always feel that there is a silent majority who support their anti- side of the issue, a vote would bring people together and enlighten their perspectives.

 

[strung_out7]

If the vote came back that those opposed were in a genuine minority, would you accept it?

If the vote came back that those opposed were in a general majority, would you accept it?

 

[Gough]

I'm not going to pretend we have anything like similar circumstances, so I think my position is much softer on it than yours.

I'm sick to death of allowing marriage to be used as a proxy for homophobia, because that is all this is. I've now been out longer than I was in, and can handle, mock, get angry about this whole thing, and it doesn't affect me much. But this isn't good for others, as has been pointed out, and the government can put an end to all this s**t today but chooses not to.

 

[Watchyourwaite]

There are people who will always feel that there is a silent majority who support their anti- side of the issue, a vote would bring people together and enlighten their perspectives.

When has that ever happened?
If anything the opposite is normally true.

 

[Taylor]

I'm sick to death of allowing marriage to be used as a proxy for homophobia, because that is all this is. I've now been out longer than I was in, and can handle, mock, get angry about this whole thing, and it doesn't affect me much. But this isn't good for others, as has been pointed out, and the government can put an end to all this s**t today but chooses not to.

I don't think the government vote is as powerful for helping others as knowing the anti-side comments heard represent a tiny portion of the population. But again, that's just my experience.