- Sep 21, 2009
- 16,746
- 14,953
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
I think we need to make sure that there is a problem with same sex parents, and make it as public as possible! That's the only way to protect the children!
Society/Culture New Anti-Gay Marriage commercial
- Thread starter Filthy Sanchez
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Sep 21, 2009
- 16,746
- 14,953
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Or... Put it this way... If you actually read Sydney Bloods' post... and had the ability to understand it... You would realise why you don't need to spend your time "writing a point by point rebuttal". You could actually just rebut his entire post...
I'd love to see where you held true to "the line (mistakenly) attributed to Voltaire "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." ".
When it was actually an opinion contrary to your own...
of course he'd disagree and he'd be completely out of place to do so. it doesn't matter if the station is owned by the government its an ad. the station has fully right to exercise control over what goes to air on their channel. this isn't a debate or a political forum. its an ad. it's subject to the same rules and reg's as every other ad. if an Ad for boner nasal spray can get pulled for causing offence so can this.
whether this particular point of view gets enough airtime when debating the issue of gay marriage or not. It has nothing to do with whether an ad that's likely to cause offense to the target audience of the program it was set to air during deserves to get pulled. the station was well within its right to dump the ad.
this is not an issue of free speech, advertising particularly paid advertising has no free speech by definition. the definition of free speech is "the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint." - the advertising industry has agreed to voluntarily enact its own level of censorship and by television charging people for airtime it places restraints on who can advertise mainly who can afford it.
this family marriage group has every right to free speech. they want to hold rallies I support their right to do so, they want to put forward a candidate at an election i'll support their right to do so. they want wobble signs in the middle of kings cross i'll support their right to do. theirs some debate on Q&A or any gay marriage s**t at some local council or parliamentary submission's they have a right to be heard.
But they do not have the right to have their ad go to air simply because the station happens to be funded by the federal government. this has nothing to do with free speech. its a tv station asserting control on what goes to air on its channel. no different then chief deciding which ad's he allows on bigfooty.
the fact they talk about gay marriage in the ad doesn't make it any more important than some half wit selling doors. its a ******* AD! its not even a political ad. which they could have went through the proper channels with right disclosure statements if wanted to make an actual political based announcement. of course as you can see by reading this: http://www.adstandards.com.au/proce...uctsandissues/politicalandelectionadvertising
their attempts to link raising a child with gay marriage laws runs the risk of them running afoul of ACCC, AEC, ACMA and they'd have to not only be not for profit but they'd have to enter into a register which declares their donations and where they come from.
Last edited:
- Aug 18, 2009
- 7,234
- 6,736
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- #54
Sydney Bloods do you truly believe running an anti-gay marriage ad during Mardi Gras is on the same level as a porongraphic billboard opposite a junior footy club?
I don't really see how the add "causes offence." It goes against the views of the majority who are watching the Mardi Gras granted, but in what ways is it causing offence? It doesn't slander or personally attack gay people, it simple states that a child is best suited when growing up with a mum and a dad. Now I may have opposing views to that statement but by no means do I have a right to be offended by it.
I don't really see how the add "causes offence." It goes against the views of the majority who are watching the Mardi Gras granted, but in what ways is it causing offence? It doesn't slander or personally attack gay people, it simple states that a child is best suited when growing up with a mum and a dad. Now I may have opposing views to that statement but by no means do I have a right to be offended by it.
- Apr 4, 2013
- 13,670
- 16,890
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Thread should have stopped here.
its got nothing to do with "levels" its advertising, you either accept that there's controls on advertising or you don't. you either accept the platform has a right to protect its reputation or you don't.
as for how you don't see how it causes offence of that i have no doubt.
there's really not much to comment about here offense is emotion based, if you can't see how running an ad which says same sex couples who have kids are denying a child's "rights" and inferring they are selfishly opposing what's in the best interest of their own child might cause offense, i'd suggest you aren't a parent.
All parents take anything to do with raising their children extremely personally. And i'm quite sure anyone who is strongly in favour of gay marriage would be offended by the way the ad equates one with the other.
and no one has a "right" be offended, offense is an emotional state no different than feeling sad or pissed off. there's no objective stance of when offence can be taken any more than there's an objective stance on what's funny.
did not bother watching it, but is it as good as The KAtter PArty's last anti poster? that was hilarious in a north queensland type of jocularity
and Corey B should never have got pre-selection. he should have stopped there.
telsor
Hall of Famer
Fine. A government media body (which is what SBS is) should have no place picking and choosing between legal opinions expressed through it.
What, like in this case?
I'm in favor of gay marriage (actually I think the government should just get out of anything to do with marriage, but as that wont happen...), yet here I am defending the rights of those who oppose it.
frankly, I couldn't give a $s**t about marriage. how different is a civil partnership besides marriage lore which is frankly BS. didnt heteros fukc up any concept of it, and when you call it an institution, good grief. how many marriages have you had skilts? do you have anything good to say about the institution since you are such a seasoned campaigner, and how about those harem of wives you had you devil you.
i think gore vidal had it right, he never even consummated his partnership with his lover. sex he said, was not for your partners. sounds good to me.
the SBS is not a media body of the Australian government, its a publicly funded special broadcast channel (in fact its a hybrid model now take private and public funding), two very different things. the SBS has been independent corporation with its own charter since 1989. the federal government has zero control over content and has zero input into the channels programming decisions.
Further more it was not legal opinion it was an ad, a bunch of private citizens making bullshit claims. nothing they said would hold up in court.
You know there's nothing wrong here, but rather then play a straight bat you attempting to reshape the narrative of what went on. The AD had no more right to be aired on the SBS then any other channel.
the group got its money back, they caused the stir they wanted and got the attention they wanted. end of story.
My view too
Whilst I know you're being sarcastic, marriage is an ancient ritual where one person claim ownership of another
Quite frankly, banning marriage would be a step to a utopia
I have posted "Ban marriage" several times
Never sarcastically
Lester Burnham
Cancelled
- Jul 9, 2013
- 4,492
- 4,406
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Meanwhile a gay bitchfight has broken out between Dolce and Gabbana - and Elton John.
Dolce said last week
Elton is reported to have paid $1 million for each his two children, designing them by picking the mother donors from a catalogue. Before giving the mother a cocktail of his and partner David's sperm. The romance continues after the kids are born. They live in the next door apartment to Elton and David, being looked after by nannies.
Elton minced
Dolce said last week
You are born and you have a father and a mother. Or at least it should be like this, that's why I am not convinced by chemical children, synthetic babies, wombs for rent.
Elton is reported to have paid $1 million for each his two children, designing them by picking the mother donors from a catalogue. Before giving the mother a cocktail of his and partner David's sperm. The romance continues after the kids are born. They live in the next door apartment to Elton and David, being looked after by nannies.
Elton minced
Your archaic thinking is out of step with the times, just like your fashions. I shall never wear Dolce and Gabbana ever again. #BoycottDolceGabbana.
- Sep 21, 2009
- 16,746
- 14,953
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Jul 20, 2014
- 760
- 1,392
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- North Melbourne
- Banned
- #66
Personally thought it was disgraceful, i'm sad these thoughts even exist in society.
Lester Burnham
Cancelled
- Jul 9, 2013
- 4,492
- 4,406
- AFL Club
- Geelong
I agree. It's sad that some children miss out on having a mother.
Business partners Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana, who are both gay and were a couple for 23 years until breaking up in 2005, have rejected same-sex marriage in the past.
But in an interview with Italian magazine Panorama this weekend they went further saying they also didn't agree with the idea of gay families.
"We oppose gay adoptions," they say, "The only family is the traditional one.
"No chemical offsprings and rented uterus: life has a natural flow, there are things that should not be changed."
Domenico Dolce went on to say that having children should be an "act of love".
He said: "You are born to a mother and a father - or at least that's how it should be.
"I call children of chemistry, synthetic children. Rented uterus, semen chosen from a catalogue."
Stefano Gabbana added: "The family is not a fad. In it there is a supernatural sense of belonging."
In an interview in 2006, Gabbana revealed in another Italian magazine that he had approached a woman to be the mother of his baby but said he struggled with the idea.
"I am opposed to the idea of a child growing up with two gay parents," he said.
"A child needs a mother and a father. I could not imagine my childhood without my mother. I also believe that it is cruel to take a baby away from its mother."
But in an interview with Italian magazine Panorama this weekend they went further saying they also didn't agree with the idea of gay families.
"We oppose gay adoptions," they say, "The only family is the traditional one.
"No chemical offsprings and rented uterus: life has a natural flow, there are things that should not be changed."
Domenico Dolce went on to say that having children should be an "act of love".
He said: "You are born to a mother and a father - or at least that's how it should be.
"I call children of chemistry, synthetic children. Rented uterus, semen chosen from a catalogue."
Stefano Gabbana added: "The family is not a fad. In it there is a supernatural sense of belonging."
In an interview in 2006, Gabbana revealed in another Italian magazine that he had approached a woman to be the mother of his baby but said he struggled with the idea.
"I am opposed to the idea of a child growing up with two gay parents," he said.
"A child needs a mother and a father. I could not imagine my childhood without my mother. I also believe that it is cruel to take a baby away from its mother."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/31896339
telsor
Hall of Famer
The government provides 80% of the funding. It's a government body and thus should provide a balance of opinions.
If it hasn't been banned by some agency, it's a legal opinion. If it wouldn't hold up in court, why has nobody taken them to court over it?
All opinions should be allowed to be presented. Banning those you don't like is censorship.
- Jul 20, 2014
- 760
- 1,392
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- North Melbourne
- Banned
- #69
Nonsense.I agree. It's sad that some children miss out on having a mother.
Business partners Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana, who are both gay and were a couple for 23 years until breaking up in 2005, have rejected same-sex marriage in the past.
But in an interview with Italian magazine Panorama this weekend they went further saying they also didn't agree with the idea of gay families.
"We oppose gay adoptions," they say, "The only family is the traditional one.
"No chemical offsprings and rented uterus: life has a natural flow, there are things that should not be changed."
Domenico Dolce went on to say that having children should be an "act of love".
He said: "You are born to a mother and a father - or at least that's how it should be.
"I call children of chemistry, synthetic children. Rented uterus, semen chosen from a catalogue."
Stefano Gabbana added: "The family is not a fad. In it there is a supernatural sense of belonging."
In an interview in 2006, Gabbana revealed in another Italian magazine that he had approached a woman to be the mother of his baby but said he struggled with the idea.
"I am opposed to the idea of a child growing up with two gay parents," he said.
"A child needs a mother and a father. I could not imagine my childhood without my mother. I also believe that it is cruel to take a baby away from its mother."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/31896339
- Apr 4, 2013
- 13,670
- 16,890
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
How did humanity deal with it when it was so common before modern medicine?
Lester Burnham
Cancelled
- Jul 9, 2013
- 4,492
- 4,406
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Dad would do his best with help from Grandmas and aunties. It's not exactly an ideal scenario to be aiming for when considering adoption policies.
As the song goes
Motherless children run a hard road when your mother is dead
Your father will do the best he can when your mother is dead
- Apr 4, 2013
- 13,670
- 16,890
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
What song is that? What's the difference between aunts, grandmas and teams of nannies btw?
Malcolm Turnbull did all right for himself.
JeffDunne
TheBrownDog
I'm guessing the people that support this sort of hate speak are also the same people angry at the Family Court for being prejudiced against men?
it is not a government body, it's government funded nothing more. No where in the corporations charter does it state it requires a balance of opinion, SBS is not the ABC the ABC has it because the ABC is still actually a government media outlet, public funding of the SBS is an entirely different setup.
No legal opinion is an expert in law laying down the explanation and rationale behind a judgement or ruling or sometimes challenging a ruling. They haven't been sued because they are layman talking s**t, if they claimed what they said was legal opinion then they probably would be sued.
Of course they should, and they do, but a Paid ad on a TV network is not the platform. I've already posted as to why paid advertising isn't a vehicle for free speech, the entire tv industry would need dramatic remodel and likely result in many networks seeing red.
Last edited:
Lester Burnham
Cancelled
- Jul 9, 2013
- 4,492
- 4,406
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Similar threads
- Poll
