Marriage equality

Remove this Banner Ad

Carlton and Hawthorn's statements on the issue are really weird. They would have been better saying nothing rather than bumble around and ultimately say nothing.

They remind me of the West Wing episode where Bartlett had to respond to the issue of affirmative action because his opponent did, and they had to come up with the perfect statement that sounded like they were wading in but also leave people absolutely unsure of what side he was taking.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

iBeng said:
No no! A book thats 2000 years old and translated many times, containing eyewitness accounts of events that said eyewitness was never at, should certainly be forefront in importance on a stance on human rights.
Click to expand...

Like .....:heavycheck::heavycheck::heavycheck::heavycheck::heavycheck:


It all comes down to the Snake-Headed Apple Salesman .......if you can convince yourself of that ... then you can believe anything...........
 
I don't believe that my football club aashould be involved in this debate. Whichever side of the fence you choose to sit on.Our football club brings all people together with their love of football.I would hate to have anyone not feel welcome or a part of our club because of a political debate/decision that has nothing to do with football.
 
marooned said:
I don't believe that my football club aashould be involved in this debate. Whichever side of the fence you choose to sit on.Our football club brings all people together with their love of football.I would hate to have anyone not feel welcome or a part of our club because of a political debate/decision that has nothing to do with football.
Click to expand...

It would sure be a shame if a group of people were excluded from something.
 
Prefer Carlton's approach... state the club's position (pro equality) but doesn't take an official side. Change shouldn't be pushed down people's throats from all angles. In fact, it will lead to the survey being a lot closer to 50:50 than it ever should have been
 
BRAB said:
It would sure be a shame if a group of people were excluded from something.
Click to expand...
I have played footy with gay teammates and a couple of religious nuts should either feel marginalized at a football club the answer is no.
 
The club doesn't speak for us individually they speak as their organisation and I would be very disappointed in the club if they didn't state their belief in marriage equality, they already do or will have members of the LGBTQI employed at the club. They have to show leadership in the community and on this I believe they have.
Individually I support their stance and opinion on this. ️‍
I respect that others do not share this opinion but the club are not speaking specifically for you. I am hopeful many who disagree will meet people through your life that change your opinion on this.
 
marooned said:
I have played footy with gay teammates and a couple of religious nuts should either feel marginalized at a football club the answer is no.
Click to expand...

If people feel insecure about other people getting married, when it has no effect on their daily lives, then they need to reassess what makes them feel marginalized.

Its not like we are debating if its OK for gays to burn churches down or shoot at religious practitioners.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Whether you plan to vote yes or no, the reality is relationships of all types are happening now and have done for a long long time. And the world is still turning.

I sincerely hope the debate doesn't get nasty - there are too many good people with strong views on both sides.
 
mikey127 said:
I would have thought consulting noth sides of the debate would be the fair thing to do
Click to expand...

Given it took until 5AD for ministers to even begin to conduct marriages for christians (given it was previously civil ceremony) and until the 12th century for the Roman Catholic church to formally define marriage as a sacrament I tend to find it very hipocrotocal of the Christian faith to decide that their word on the subject to be the last unyielding word on what marriage is personally.

In the end noone is discriminating against Christians here or reducing their access to human rights and the fact that the church spent thousands of years not even caring about marriage doesn't give it the right to have a say against discrimination of a part of society.
 
Last edited:
mikey127 said:
I would have thought consulting noth sides of the debate would be the fair thing to do
Click to expand...
Anti-gay marriage Christians aren't the other side of the debate except for the fact that they choose to be. By granting one group certain rights you don't affect the rights of a third party. Rights aren't a finite resource.

One of many reasons the postal survey is bullshit
 
It's a fair point you can't really bash any religion, ethnic group or culture these days yet Christians are fair game. Not even religious and it kinda bugs me. I can completely see how a Catholic would feel marginalised in this current day and age.
 
Fatcat08 said:
Given it took until 5AD for ministers to even begin to conduct marriages for christians (given it was previously civil ceremony) and until the 12th century for the Roman Catholic church to formally define marriage as a sacrament I tend to find it very hipocrotocal of the Christian faith to decide that their word on the subject to be the last unyielding word on what marriage is personally.

In the end noone is discriminating against Christians here or reducing their access to human rights and the fact that the church spent thousands of years not even caring about marriage doesn't give it the right to have a say against discrimination of a part of society.
Click to expand...
Don't see what that has to do with consulting both sides. Would debate a lot of what you said but dont find online debates very useful on this type of thing.
 
notting18 said:
Anti-gay marriage Christians aren't the other side of the debate except for the fact that they choose to be. By granting one group certain rights you don't affect the rights of a third party. Rights aren't a finite resource.

One of many reasons the postal survey is bullshit
Click to expand...
That might be your view but no doubt there are people within in the Lions be they pkayers coaches staff who are voting no. I think they should have been consulted.
 
mikey127 said:
Its funny people on her are calling effectively for tokirence and respect for the gay community but movking and being intolirent if Christians
Click to expand...
Haven't been reading this thread but overall frankly of the 2 sides of the argument I have seen in the press and on social media, neither have exactly been covering themselves in glory. Pro-Marriage advocates seeking inclusion and equal opinion and rights have been very quick to crack down on any no voters, and don't even get me started on that embarrassing, pathetic, blatant manipulation that is the pro-'no' advertisement referring to school programs.

I did however have to have a chuckle at Corey Bernardi's spectacular backfire over the last couple of days when he singled out a school fundraiser. Was a fantastic result for the fundraiser he targeted.

Not entirely surprising though given the emotion that this debate triggers and the divisive nature of the topic.

Edit - Just read about the Tony Abbott headbutt, and as much as I think he is a dinosaur that is yet another example of how ugly this debate is getting by both sides, not cool.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top