Political Discussion

[Deaneus!]

"In the face of consistent public support for same-sex marriage, ".....the right is pushing the prime minister to delay, obfuscate and ultimately scupper reform.

Stopped reading after italics... I have yet to see it come close.

I didn't see any italics anywhere. Which bit?

 

[Damp Squarie]

Oh sorry I meant in ""

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

"In the face of consistent public support for same-sex marriage, ".....the right is pushing the prime minister to delay, obfuscate and ultimately scupper reform.

Stopped reading after italics... I have yet to see it come close.

It's funny, there was a fairly large opinion poll not that long ago where the victor was the side offering the plebiscite.

 

[Mego Red]

It's funny, there was a fairly large opinion poll not that long ago where the victor was the side offering the plebiscite.

When was there a vote for a plebiscite?

I do remember a vote for someone to form government, but I think many are already regretting this. Clearly, if they're too weak to make a decision on something as simple as marriage equality without going back to a $180m poll, then I don't know how they're going to make a decision on actual complicated issues, like fiscal policy.

Howard didn't need a plebiscite to change the law to make marriage only a man and woman. Just did it. But there was a conservative leader who knew how to get things done.

 

[Mego Red]

"In the face of consistent public support for same-sex marriage, ".....the right is pushing the prime minister to delay, obfuscate and ultimately scupper reform.

Stopped reading after italics... I have yet to see it come close.

Pretty much every public poll of the last 18 months has reinforced this. It is obvious and widespread and across the entire Australian community.

Here you go, here's one from today: http://www.nine.com.au/article/8145152?site=news. From Channel 9 "Australians back gay marriage - poll".

Here's how religious Australians feel:

"The survey also asked about religious affiliation. It found that support for same-sex marriage is:
53% among Christians (with 41% opposed)
62% among members of other religions (with 30% opposed), and
67% among people with no religion (with 24% opposed)."

http://www.australianmarriageequality.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/marriagereligion.pdf

Here's how migrant Australians feel:

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/...nt-backgrounds-support-same-sex-marriage-poll

And here's how the conservative media is reporting it, via the Fin Review:

http://www.afr.com/news/politics/fairfaxipsos-poll-gay-marriage-support-at-record-20150614-ghnjhi

Australians want marriage equality. Our elected politicians should stop dicking around and pandering to the mad right wingers and just do it.

 

[Damp Squarie]

...and yet the Gay lobby don't want a plebiscite.

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

When was there a vote for a plebiscite?

I do remember a vote for someone to form government, but I think many are already regretting this. Clearly, if they're too weak to make a decision on something as simple as marriage equality without going back to a $180m poll, then I don't know how they're going to make a decision on actual complicated issues, like fiscal policy.

Howard didn't need a plebiscite to change the law to make marriage only a man and woman. Just did it. But there was a conservative leader who knew how to get things done.

There you go making assumptions again. "many are already regretting this"? Says who? I've seen the recent polls for all they are worth (hint: little) and not much love for the ALP either.

But what you are failing to understand is this. The group which were voted in to form government went in with a policy of the plebiscite. Therefore, they have a mandate to follow through with that. If people felt so strongly against it, they wouldn't have voted for it.

You can quote all the opinion polls and articles you like, it doesn't change that a government was voted in with one of its key policies, and one of its key differentiators of the opposition, being the plebiscite. So like it or lump it, it should go through. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean you get to determine that it shouldn't pass.

I don't recall any room on my voting ballot to put any exclusions for my vote.

I voted Libs (obviously) but there was plenty I didn't like about their policies - including the pleb if I'm honest, but you have to respect the democracy we live in and the cold fact that this government we have has every right to push this plebiscite through.

And any opposition to this from the ALP and Greens just enforces my original point. That they are not genuine about gay marriage, instead are using this as a political point of difference and point scoring exercise.

Otherwise, yes its a lot of money. Yes its a waste of time. Yes it may give a platform for hateful views (which would come out regardless). But at the end of it, gay people would be legally allowed to marry. Or isn't it worth the hassle? Clearly not.

 

[Deaneus!]

But what you are failing to understand is this. The group which were voted in to form government went in with a policy of the plebiscite. Therefore, they have a mandate to follow through with that. If people felt so strongly against it, they wouldn't have voted for it.

I always smile when i see things like this.

"If the people felt so strongly" - the election went down to the wire as I recall.

The people were strongly 50/50 on the subject.

 

[Mego Red]

...and yet the Gay lobby don't want a plebiscite.

No.

Because the plebiscite is just there to delay and to give extremists a chance to attack the gay community. It is a cowardly PM move to placate the far right fundamentalists in his party, who believe every poll could maybe be wrong and maybe Australians are as prejudiced as them.

Why do you think the Libs want a plebiscite?

They don't get a $180m opinion poll for every other decision they make.

If they agree in marriage equality and Labor and Greens agree as well, why do you need a divisive, expensive poll.

Just pass the legislation, like everywhere else already has.

 

[Mego Red]

There you go making assumptions again. "many are already regretting this"? Says who? I've seen the recent polls for all they are worth (hint: little) and not much love for the ALP either.

But what you are failing to understand is this. The group which were voted in to form government went in with a policy of the plebiscite. Therefore, they have a mandate to follow through with that. If people felt so strongly against it, they wouldn't have voted for it.

You can quote all the opinion polls and articles you like, it doesn't change that a government was voted in with one of its key policies, and one of its key differentiators of the opposition, being the plebiscite. So like it or lump it, it should go through. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean you get to determine that it shouldn't pass.

I don't recall any room on my voting ballot to put any exclusions for my vote.

I voted Libs (obviously) but there was plenty I didn't like about their policies - including the pleb if I'm honest, but you have to respect the democracy we live in and the cold fact that this government we have has every right to push this plebiscite through.

And any opposition to this from the ALP and Greens just enforces my original point. That they are not genuine about gay marriage, instead are using this as a political point of difference and point scoring exercise.

Otherwise, yes its a lot of money. Yes its a waste of time. Yes it may give a platform for hateful views (which would come out regardless). But at the end of it, gay people would be legally allowed to marry. Or isn't it worth the hassle? Clearly not.

This is wrong on so many levels.

Forgetting my view on people already falling off the Libs - and you can believe that or not, its neither here nor there - you can hardly say that stumbling across the line with barely the ability to make government is a mandate to rule.

And even if it was a smash, are you seriously suggesting this was a one issue election?

That people voted purely on the plebiscite question?

I have no doubt the Libs views on the plebiscite may have gotten people to vote against them, but I doubt there is a single Australian who voted FOR the Libs because of it.

If you truly don't believe Labor and Greens are sincere in their opposition to the Plebiscite, put the question of marriage equality to a conscience vote and it will be answered immediately.

And considering there is ZERO obligation on the Libs to follow through with any plebiscite result - as they've clearly stated - I have absolutely no faith the result would mean anything.

 

[Deaneus!]

I foresee:

the plebiscite goes ahead
the vote comes back maybe 65/35 or 70/30
the government internally shitfights over the result
MT begrudgingly allows gay marriage
Cory Bernardi and his boyfriend go apeshit and split the Liberal party

it sounds ridiculous, but when is anything not?

 

[Vader]

Cory Bernardi and his boyfriend go apeshit and split the Liberal party

I really hope that this happens. It would provide a better balance to Australian politics, and allow the Liberal party to return to their traditional position on the centre-right.

The left already has it's extreme nut-job party. They're called the Greens. The presence of the Greens allows Labor to occupy their traditional position, on the centre-left. They don't need to pander to the extremists within the party, because the extremists all vote for the Greens anyway.

The right really doesn't have an extremist nut-job equivalent, and as a result the Liberals in particular have been dragged to the right. Having Bernardi form a new party, slightly to the right of Genghis Khan, would give the far right nut jobs somewhere else to go, and allow the mainstream Liberal party to return to their traditional position.

I believe that the majority of Australians are reasonably close to the centre, politically speaking. Sometimes they will lean to the left, sometimes to the right, resulting in changes of government. I believe that the Australian political system works best when the major parties are reasonably close together.

I think that the Liberals' recent drift away from the centre is largely responsible for the disaster that the Federal Parliament has been since 2004 (when Howard's Liberals gained control of the Senate, allowing the introduction of Workchoices). It has opened up a political gap between Labor and Liberal, resulting in greater antagonism and less cooperation from both sides of the House. As a result, we've had a series of abysmal governments (from both sides) for more than a decade now.

Allowing the Liberals to move back towards the centre (while still remaining on the right) would restore balance, and by extension a return to "good government".

 

[Deaneus!]

The right really doesn't have an extremist nut-job equivalent, and as a result the Liberals in particular have been dragged to the right.

I had always assumed this was the Nationals, but it seems they're really just country Liberals; it was hard to tell with Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen and Barnaby Joyce as members.

I wonder if Cory Bernardi's new party would be like Norsefire from V For Vendetta.

 

[Damp Squarie]

No.

Because the plebiscite is just there to delay and to give extremists a chance to attack the gay community. It is a cowardly PM move to placate the far right fundamentalists in his party, who believe every poll could maybe be wrong and maybe Australians are as prejudiced as them.

Why do you think the Libs want a plebiscite?

They don't get a $180m opinion poll for every other decision they make.

If they agree in marriage equality and Labor and Greens agree as well, why do you need a divisive, expensive poll.

Just pass the legislation, like everywhere else already has.

Extremists?? That a bit extreme isn't it?
I think the Libs want a plebiscite because they know the gay vote will have more of a chance to fail.

 

[Bicks]

Hmmmm...speaking of "nutjobs".....

It's not exclusive to the right only..
Who'd a thunk that...
http://www.skynews.com.au/news/nati...stian--no--campaign-event-forced-to-fold.html

Christian 'no' campaign event forced to fold
Published: 10:18 am, Saturday, 17 September 2016




Christian groups have been forced to cancel a same-sex marriage meeting in Sydney amid physical threats.

Four Christian groups were scheduled to meet at the Mercure Sydney Airport Hotel in preparation for a 'no' campaign for the potential plebiscite in February 11.

The Accor Hotel group has since confirmed the function - scheduled for next week - was abandoned over safety concerns for staff and guests after community comments on social media left employees and guests 'rattled', News Corp reports.

The Mercure Hotel had reportedly temporarily shut down their Facebook page.

'We appreciate your comments in relation to the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) and their planned event at our hotel. Following an objective review regarding the safety and security of our hotel guests and staff, the decision has been made that the event will no longer be held at our venue,' Mecure said in a statement on Facebook on Friday.

About one hundred people - from the Sydney Anglicans, Sydney Catholics, the Marriage Alliance and the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) were expected to attend the meeting.

The event was brought to light after gay news website SameSame reported that the ACL were planning a 'secret event' in Sydney and called on the hotel to 'immediately cancel the booking'.

LGBTIQA Activist, Pauline Pantsdown told SameSame hosting the event by ACL 'can only create discord and anxiety in the community'.


Share this:

- See more at: http://www.skynews.com.au/news/nati...vent-forced-to-fold.html#sthash.MufmuCUY.dpuf

 

[Vader]

Hmmmm...speaking of "nutjobs".....

It's not exclusive to the right only..
Who'd a thunk that...

Has anybody said that they were exclusive to the right?

Bernardi is definitely a right wing nut-job. But he's no better and no worse than equivalents on the left (Bob Brown springs to mind).

Extremist nut-jobs from both sides are equally undesirable to me.

 

[Mego Red]

Oh, Bob Brown was always alright.

 

[Mego Red]

Hmmmm...speaking of "nutjobs".....

It's not exclusive to the right only..
Who'd a thunk that...
http://www.skynews.com.au/news/nati...stian--no--campaign-event-forced-to-fold.html

Christian 'no' campaign event forced to fold
Published: 10:18 am, Saturday, 17 September 2016




Christian groups have been forced to cancel a same-sex marriage meeting in Sydney amid physical threats.

Four Christian groups were scheduled to meet at the Mercure Sydney Airport Hotel in preparation for a 'no' campaign for the potential plebiscite in February 11.

The Accor Hotel group has since confirmed the function - scheduled for next week - was abandoned over safety concerns for staff and guests after community comments on social media left employees and guests 'rattled', News Corp reports.

The Mercure Hotel had reportedly temporarily shut down their Facebook page.

'We appreciate your comments in relation to the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) and their planned event at our hotel. Following an objective review regarding the safety and security of our hotel guests and staff, the decision has been made that the event will no longer be held at our venue,' Mecure said in a statement on Facebook on Friday.

About one hundred people - from the Sydney Anglicans, Sydney Catholics, the Marriage Alliance and the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) were expected to attend the meeting.

The event was brought to light after gay news website SameSame reported that the ACL were planning a 'secret event' in Sydney and called on the hotel to 'immediately cancel the booking'.

LGBTIQA Activist, Pauline Pantsdown told SameSame hosting the event by ACL 'can only create discord and anxiety in the community'.


Share this:

- See more at: http://www.skynews.com.au/news/nati...vent-forced-to-fold.html#sthash.MufmuCUY.dpuf

As I said earlier - religious extremists planning a meeting to discuss ways to oppress normal Aussies.

If these were Muslims instead of Christians, we'd get different coverage.

That being said, happy to acknowledge there's idiots on both sides.

 

[Vader]

Or to put it another way..

The left wing extremists found a way of stopping the right wing extremists from having a (peaceful) meeting.

There is no winner in this story.

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

The ironing of this whole situation is thus.

Turnbull is clearly more left than your average Lib.

If he had won the election with an overwhelming majority, then he would have had the credits to tell the Abbotts and Bernardis to get stuffed and do things his way, most probably including a conscience vote.

Instead he's relying on the far right Libs so has to make concessions.

So while Bitch **** Bill did his "victory" lap after the election, all he really achieved was giving the likes of Tony Abbott more power.

 

[Mego Red]

Look, I was really supportive of Turnbull.

But he caved very early on in his Prime Ministership to the crazy Bernardis of the party, and when he failed to follow on through on his beliefs, he saw his support plummet.

His support from the Australian public as preferred prime minister fell from 78% to 49% in the lead up to the election.

They'll eventually knife him anyway, so it's a pity he didn't actually stand up for what he believed. Instead, he is a monument to compromised values.

In any event - Bill Shorten did nothing but run an election campaign. Malcolm shot himself, Shorten never shot him.

 

[brucetiki]

What a sad, sorry pair of individuals.....as if that's not bad enough their proud of it!!

http://www.news.com.au/finance/work...SF&utm_source=News.com.au&utm_medium=Facebook

The Terrorgraph was spun a great lie - the girls just hammed it up for them.

https://mumbrella.com.au/star-daily-telegraphs-new-breed-bludger-expose-admits-made-397063

 

[Mego Red]

It's not at all okay to compare gay people fighting for their rights to Nazi Germany. We know this, you know this. Everyone knows this. Except, as it turns out, 'The Australian' cartoonist Bill Leak. So, purely for his benefit, comedian Ben McLeay explains why it's not okay to depict the LGBTIQ community as the Nazis that murdered so many of them.

http://www.sbs.com.au/comedy/articl...fit-why-its-not-okay-compare-gay-people-nazis

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

It's not at all okay to compare gay people fighting for their rights to Nazi Germany. We know this, you know this. Everyone knows this. Except, as it turns out, 'The Australian' cartoonist Bill Leak. So, purely for his benefit, comedian Ben McLeay explains why it's not okay to depict the LGBTIQ community as the Nazis that murdered so many of them.

http://www.sbs.com.au/comedy/articl...fit-why-its-not-okay-compare-gay-people-nazis

It would be almost impossible to make Bill understand just how harmful and morally repugnant his actions are, but at least we can take solace in the fact that they are fighting a losing battle and, in all likelihood, his grandchildren will be deeply, irrevocably ashamed of him.

This is the thing that amazes me. Whatever people's personal views are, surely they can see that the 'battle' has been lost. It's over.

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

It's not at all okay to compare gay people fighting for their rights to Nazi Germany. We know this, you know this. Everyone knows this. Except, as it turns out, 'The Australian' cartoonist Bill Leak. So, purely for his benefit, comedian Ben McLeay explains why it's not okay to depict the LGBTIQ community as the Nazis that murdered so many of them.

http://www.sbs.com.au/comedy/articl...fit-why-its-not-okay-compare-gay-people-nazis

It's satire. Get over it.