Possibile Gay Marriage Consensus?

[Gough]

Gay activists reality peerceptions are equally as objectively and demonstrably wrong so why not act the same way?

Why do results of gay marriage polls result in gay activists lying???

You're the only one who has been caught out fibbing mate, and when called out on it you did a bigger backflip than Tom Daley.

 

[dymot]

You're the only one who has been caught out fibbing mate, and when called out on it you did a bigger backflip than Tom Daley.

Where have I been caught out lying? Gay activist seem to put their polls in front of us and sprout it as fact yet ignore other polls which lower their result/cause.

As for my post I said the real result will be somewhere around 15-25% lower than the actual result of that poll is pretty close smack abng on that approximate range in that poll which I quoted from the ABC. So again how have I lied when I gave an approximate figure through use of the words somewhere around 15-25% lower and have provided with a poll between 13-14% LOWER THAN the 65% figure in the other one fropm galaxy.

 

[samFFC]

Where have I been caught out lying? Gay activist seem to put their polls in front of us and sprout it as fact yet ignore other polls which lower their result/cause.

As for my post I said the real result will be somewhere around 15-25% lower than the actual result of that poll is pretty close smack abng on that approximate range in that poll which I quoted from the ABC. So again how have I lied when I gave an approximate figure through use of the words somewhere around 15-25% lower and have provided with a poll between 13-14% LOWER THAN the 65% figure in the other one fropm galaxy.

No what you said was this

As for the 65% bit where did you get that figure from? There is so much variation in the result of the se supposed straw polls nobody takes them overly seriously and substantially anymore. The figure actually would be quite alot lower than that somewhere around the 15 to 25 % mark.

If you meant it should be 15-25% LOWER, as you now claim,

Firstly: you should have been more clear.

Secondly: you have not provided any evidence for this claim.

The only poll that produced a result lower than 65% (as did the links I posted) was the ABC Vote Compass link. And it was NOT 15-25% lower.

And to be clear with that result, there was a "neutral" option. Either you need to directly compare "Disagree" with "Agree", or half the neutral vote and put half in each column. If you exclude the neutrals:
Support SSM (disagree with the statement): 51.9%
Do not support SSM (agree with statement): 36.25%.

Overall,
including those that are neutral, the figure is 51.9% (which is less than 15% off by original claim of 65%);
excluding neutrals, the figure is 58.9% (which is even closer to the 65% mark).

Either way, please provide further evidence to support your claim that 15-25% LESS than 65% support SSM. This is important, because it would mean that <50% support it. As it stands, the only evidence posted thus far suggests a figure of between 50 and 70% is most accurate.

 

[Westerberg]

Straw man arguments about polygamy and made up stats - compelling stuff from the traditional marriage defence league

 

[dymot]

No what you said was this



If you meant it should be 15-25% LOWER, as you now claim,

Firstly: you should have been more clear.

Secondly: you have not provided any evidence for this claim.

The only poll that produced a result lower than 65% (as did the links I posted) was the ABC Vote Compass link. And it was NOT 15-25% lower.

And to be clear with that result, there was a "neutral" option. Either you need to directly compare "Disagree" with "Agree", or half the neutral vote and put half in each column. If you exclude the neutrals:
Support SSM (disagree with the statement): 51.9%
Do not support SSM (agree with statement): 36.25%.

Overall,
including those that are neutral, the figure is 51.9% (which is less than 15% off by original claim of 65%);
excluding neutrals, the figure is 58.9% (which is even closer to the 65% mark).

Either way, please provide further evidence to support your claim that 15-25% LESS than 65% support SSM. This is important, because it would mean that <50% support it. As it stands, the only evidence posted thus far suggests a figure of between 50 and 70% is most accurate.

Somewhere around does not mean exact and does not mean directly in that range. The range is used as a guide and was a prediction not fact not stated as fact. This is the same kind of hypothesising used in science when a prediction is made and someone says some kind of event is going to be approximately or near the 15-20% mark for example. Therefore you are simply clutching at straws trying to say that there is a big difference and I was blatantly lying when the comment made was nothing but a prediction and secondly it was a mere 1.8% or whatever of my predicted range.

For you to then say that 58.9 when adding the two together makes it closer to the mark and somehow validates that figure to be true is identical to what you have alleged I was doing and thus you are being a hypocrite in the procees

How bout you show me now where 65% of Australians support gay marriage (with results that demonstrate this stance and outcome with conviction).

 

[dymot]

Straw man arguments about polygamy and made up stats - compelling stuff from the traditional marriage defence league

Wow apparently we should support same sex marriage because simply we should support everyone's rights without question and give equality to all. Straw man arguments right there too.

 

[Gus Poyet]

They need to hold a referendum simply asking:

Do you give a s**t about gay marriage?

Word it that way so there's not doubt as to what the question is asking.

I'd be interested in the resposne to that question. I think the NO option would be quite high.

Anyone who answers NO should then be excluded from any further referendums on the matter.

 

[dymot]

They need to hold a referendum simply asking:

Do you give a s**t about gay marriage?

Word it that way so there's not doubt as to what the question is asking.

I'd be interested in the resposne to that question. I think the NO option would be quite high.

There could be doubt raised. For example people may say they don't give a s**t about gay marriage with the understanding that voting no means it will not have any implications on current laws. As for the referendum, doesn't the question have to be worded in such a way that answering yes means you are affirmative for the change.

 

[Gus Poyet]

There could be doubt raised. For example people may say they don't give a s**t about gay marriage with the understanding that voting no means it will not have any implications on current laws. As for the referendum, doesn't the question have to be worded in such a way that answering yes means you are affirmative for the change.

This referendum should be intended to work out what % of people care about the gay marriage arguement.

We're told constantly that there's this large % of people that actually give a rats arse about the issue.

This is the figure i'd be most interested in.

 

[dymot]

This referendum should be intended to work out what % of people care about the gay marriage arguement.

We're told constantly that there's this large % of people that actually give a rats arse about the issue.

This is the figure i'd be most interested in.

Yeah but even if they don't care about the argument or the issue it still doesn't address the focal issue of whether they support it or not.

 

[Westerberg]

Wow apparently we should support same sex marriage because simply we should support everyone's rights without question and give equality to all. Straw man arguments right there too.

We should support equality unless there is good reasons not to i.e. that it will harm society. There is strong evidence to suggest polygamy is harmful to society, particularly for women and children. (http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/the_problem_with_polygamy.html)

If the same evidence exists for gay marriage I'm all ears.

 

[Gus Poyet]

Yeah but even if they don't care about the argument or the issue it still doesn't address the focal issue of whether they support it or not.

They don't have to support either position. They can just not care either way what happens.

 

[Gus Poyet]

We should support equality unless there is good reasons not to i.e. that it will harm society. There is strong evidence to suggest polygamy is harmful to society, particularly for women and children. (http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/the_problem_with_polygamy.html)

If the same evidence exists for gay marriage I'm all ears.

So you and people like you get to decide what constitutes equality?

 

[Westerberg]

So you and people like you get to decide what constitutes equality?

Care to elaborate? What do you mean by me and people like me?

Equality is obviously complicated, I'm just suggesting we follow best available evidence

 

[Gus Poyet]

Care to elaborate? What do you mean by me and people like me?

Equality is obviously complicated, I'm just suggesting we follow best available evidence

Evidence shouldn't play any part in equality. There is no "evidence" when it comes to gay marriage. There's only a personal opinion.

Most people who scream for equality for one group will undoubtedly deny it to another group on another issue. Which is why equality is a warped concept.

 

[samFFC]

Somewhere around does not mean exact and does not mean directly in that range. The range is used as a guide and was a prediction not fact not stated as fact. This is the same kind of hypothesising used in science when a prediction is made and someone says some kind of event is going to be approximately or near the 15-20% mark for example. Therefore you are simply clutching at straws trying to say that there is a big difference and I was blatantly lying when the comment made was nothing but a prediction and secondly it was a mere 1.8% or whatever of my predicted range.

For you to then say that 58.9 when adding the two together makes it closer to the mark and somehow validates that figure to be true is identical to what you have alleged I was doing and thus you are being a hypocrite in the procees

How bout you show me now where 65% of Australians support gay marriage (with results that demonstrate this stance and outcome with conviction).

Please refer to the polls I posted. Despite what you say about their size or who commissioned some of them, they help to demonstrate my claim of 65%.

In particular, I refer you to:
Nielsen poll (August 2013): 65% support from 2545 respondents (which is far more than used in most Nielsen/Newspoll/Galaxy/etc. for monthly vote intention analysis)

Galaxy poll (May 2012), commissioned by Sunday Herald Sun: "only a third of voters against the reform".

Survey in Teresa Gambaro (LNP) seat of Brisbane (2011): 1500 voters, 73% support.

Now, could you please show me ANY reasonably valid survey that demonstrates that the majority of Australians do not support Same-Sex Marriage?

 

[Gus Poyet]

Now, could you please show me ANY reasonably valid survey that demonstrates that the majority of Australians do not support Same-Sex Marriage?

The fact that when there's any kind of rally to show support for gay marriage 99.8% of the population doesn't turn out to support it?

 

[samFFC]

The fact that when there's any kind of rally to show support for gay marriage 99.8% of the population doesn't turn out to support it?

Now, could you please show me ANY reasonably valid survey that demonstrates that the majority of Australians do not support Same-Sex Marriage?

Survey being the operative term.

Also, how much is 3000 out of 22 million?
http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/23/hitting-the-footpaths-for-the-no-carbon-tax-rally/
versus what proportion of people do not support the Carbon Tax?

 

[Gus Poyet]

Survey being the operative term.

Also, how much is 3000 out of 22 million?
http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/23/hitting-the-footpaths-for-the-no-carbon-tax-rally/
versus what proportion of people do not support the Carbon Tax?

Yes surveys. Never pay them much heed.

Money is more important to people than Gay marriage would be is the bottom line here.

Thus if there's a perception that the carbon tax pushes bills up it goes without saying more people in the general community would have an interest in it than gay marriage as an issue.

 

[samFFC]

Yes surveys. Never pay them much heed.

Money is more important to people than Gay marriage would be is the bottom line here.

Thus if there's a perception that the carbon tax pushes bills up it goes without saying more people in the general community would have an interest in it than gay marriage as an issue.

It doesn't matter whether money is more important than Same-Sex Marriage or not. Something has to be "the most important", but that doesn't mean we ignore all issues below that on the ladder. Parliament is capable of tackling more than one issue at a time.

The point I was trying to make with the 3000 at the anti-Carbon Tax rally was that that was approx 0.014% of the Australian population. Yet, that is irrelevant because polls and general consensus is that the Carbon Tax is at best highly contested, and at worst, quite unpopular.

More than 3000 in Melbourne alone for this, with more rallying in other cities: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-12/thousands-rally-in-support-of-gay-marriage/4007664

Thousands more at this rally day a few months later: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...-gay-civil-union/story-fndo48ca-1226448125920

 

[Gus Poyet]

It doesn't matter whether money is more important than Same-Sex Marriage or not. Something has to be "the most important", but that doesn't mean we ignore all issues below that on the ladder. Parliament is capable of tackling more than one issue at a time.

The point I was trying to make with the 3000 at the anti-Carbon Tax rally was that that was approx 0.014% of the Australian population. Yet, that is irrelevant because polls and general consensus is that the Carbon Tax is at best highly contested, and at worst, quite unpopular.

More than 3000 in Melbourne alone for this, with more rallying in other cities: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-12/thousands-rally-in-support-of-gay-marriage/4007664

Thousands more at this rally day a few months later: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...-gay-civil-union/story-fndo48ca-1226448125920

The point I was making is that surveys and rallys don't provide the definitive answer to a nations views on matters.

Why?

Traditionally conservative people don't care much for protests, rallys nor IMO taking surveys. They don't want others to know their views or beliefs. We're talking about the vast majority of those who would be considered conservative (not ultra looney right wingers).

Left leaning people on the other hand love that s**t, they are far more likely to go to rallys, take surveys and generally let their views be known to others.

They however are not in anyway close to be anything like a majority in this nation.

 

[samFFC]

The point I was making is that surveys and rallys don't provide the definitive answer to a nations views on matters.

Why?

Traditionally conservative people don't care much for protests, rallys nor IMO taking surveys. They don't want others to know their views or beliefs. We're talking about the vast majority of those who would be considered conservative (not ultra looney right wingers).

Left leaning people on the other hand love that s**t, they are far more likely to go to rallys, take surveys and generally let their views be known to others.

They however are not in anyway close to be anything like a majority in this nation.

Good points, agreed.

However, the ABC Vote Compass survey was adjusted to take into account various demographics, and thus give a more accurate picture of Australia's views. So it would be reasonably appropriately weighted to take into account the conservative/left leaning populations, political party support, age, sex etc etc.. So if ever a survey was to provide an insight, that would be it.

 

[Gus Poyet]

Good points, agreed.

However, the ABC Vote Compass survey was adjusted to take into account various demographics, and thus give a more accurate picture of Australia's views. So it would be reasonably appropriately weighted to take into account the conservative/left leaning populations, political party support, age, sex etc etc.. So if ever a survey was to provide an insight, that would be it.

So this was a survey conducted by the ABC?

 

[samFFC]

So this was a survey conducted by the ABC?

Not quite.

What is this?
When Prime Minister Kevin Rudd called the federal election for September 7, the ABC immediately launched Vote Compass.
Since then, we have received more than 900,000 responses, as people used the tool to see how their views compare to the parties' policies.
Between now and election day, the ABC will reveal weighted data gathered using the application.
This report explores how people responded to questions on gay marriage, euthanasia and abortion.
The data has been weighted by gender, age, education, enrolment as a student, religion, marital status, industry and state using the latest population estimates to be a true representation of opinion at the time of the field, resulting in an effective sample size of 422,403 respondents.
Vote Compass is not a random sample. Why are the results being represented as though it is a poll?
Vote Compass is not a poll. It is primarily and fundamentally an educational tool intended to promote electoral literacy and stimulate public engagement in the policy aspect of election campaigns.
That said, respondents' views as expressed through Vote Compass can add a meaningful dimension to our understanding of public attitudes and an innovative new medium for self-expression. Ensuring that the public has a decipherable voice in the affairs of government is a critical function of a robust democracy.
Online surveys are inherently prone to selection bias but statisticians have long been able to correct for this (given the availability of certain variables) by drawing on population estimates such as Census micro-data.
We apply sophisticated weighting techniques to the data to control for the selection effects of the sample, thus enabling us to make statistical inferences about the Australian population with a high degree of confidence.
The Vote Compass data sample was weighted on the basis of: gender; age; education; students; religion; marital status.
How can you stop people from trying to game the system?
There are multiple safeguards in place to ensure the authenticity of each record in the dataset.
Vote Compass does not make its protocols in this regard public so as not to aid those that might attempt to exploit the system, but among standard safeguards such as IP address logging and cookie tracking, it also uses time codes and a series of other measures to prevent users from gaming the system.

 

[Gus Poyet]

I think it needs to be considered who of the two groups will be more likley to use the ABC website.

The ABC site would attract more left leaning people than conservatives without a doubt. Just as the Herald Sun site would attract a majority conservative viewers.

Looking at respondants to ABC stories there's a definite left leaning in the tones of the bulk of the responses.

So the ABC political compass will have a bias that I'm not sure how they can "factor" in to get an accurate view of the nations views.