Remove this Banner Ad

Cory Bernardi

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lach72
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

bombermick said:
No, only this Mick. I don't believe too many of them swallow the line that gay marriage will lead to polygamous marriage.
Click to expand...

See Corey de Bruyn and others.

If you have gay marriage you may as well have polygamous marriage, which in any event there is a much better argument for anyway given the vast majority of people are hetero and it is accepted by some religions.
 
medusala said:
See Corey de Bruyn and others.

If you have gay marriage you may as well have polygamous marriage, which in any event there is a much better argument for anyway given the vast majority of people are hetero and it is accepted by some religions.
Click to expand...
The amount of heteros v homosexuals is irrelevant when discussing rights. Polygamous marriage is a bigger issue because there are issues of abuse and welfare issues. Not so with gay marriage.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

bombermick said:
The amount of heteros v homosexuals is irrelevant when discussing rights. Polygamous marriage is a bigger issue because there are issues of abuse and welfare issues. Not so with gay marriage.
Click to expand...

How can you discuss "rights" then attempt to argue that polygamy is irrelevant? Abuse? Doesn't happen in normal marriages? Forced marriages still occur in normal marriage (cant mention that though, the multicultural lobby gets hysterical) Welfare? On what basis? Family payments could go to the mother. In any event unmarried women get welfare.

It is irrational to argue for gay marriage but not polygamy.

Disgusting the amount of bigoted mormonophobes floating around the joint.
 
Polygamy is too hard. There are so many extra variables and permutations to consider. Just leave it as marriage is between 2 people.
 
medusala said:
How can you discuss "rights" then attempt to argue that polygamy is irrelevant? Abuse? Doesn't happen in normal marriages? Forced marriages still occur in normal marriage (cant mention that though, the multicultural lobby gets hysterical) Welfare? On what basis? Family payments could go to the mother. In any event unmarried women get welfare.

It is irrational to argue for gay marriage but not polygamy.

Disgusting the amount of bigoted mormonophobes floating around the joint.
Click to expand...
You also forgot marriages of convenience to obtain permanent residency, these still happen as well.

I actually see a difference between gay marriage and polygamy but I can understand how some people would argue the case. Gay marriage is the marriage between two consenting adults eclusive of all others, polygamy is the marriage two consenting adults regardless of any others. from a personal perspective if you can put up with being married to two women/men and the crap that will come with it then good luck to you, willing to bet that the divorce rate will be very high, but it should only be allowed if any other person(s) already married to the polygamist provide their written consent to the marriage. Also under the tax act only the first marriage shall be recognised until the married party is formally divorced.
 
medusala said:
Forced marriages still occur in normal marriage (cant mention that though, the multicultural lobby gets hysterical)
Click to expand...
Still waiting for the hysteria.
 
medusala said:
How can you discuss "rights" then attempt to argue that polygamy is irrelevant? Abuse? Doesn't happen in normal marriages? Forced marriages still occur in normal marriage (cant mention that though, the multicultural lobby gets hysterical) Welfare? On what basis? Family payments could go to the mother. In any event unmarried women get welfare.

It is irrational to argue for gay marriage but not polygamy.

Disgusting the amount of bigoted mormonophobes floating around the joint.
Click to expand...
I said that the amount of heteros v homos is irrelevant when discussing what rights each should receive, as you said there are vastly more heteros. Polygamy has a history of entrenching abuse and doesn't exactly scream equality. What would happen in some Islamic/Mormon communities when their poorer men can't find a wife because their richer competitors have taken them?
 
I just don't buy that because we open it up to gay marriage we open up every other kind of marriage.

However, on topic, is Corey up for election now? Will he maintain his place on the Liberal ticket?

Sometimes I think the Liberals actually like these kinds of guys in their party, as they appeal to the far right social conservatives, however can be denounced by the rest of the party as being crazy and not in line with party policy.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Why the outrage, his is a perfectly valid point (even if you disagree with how he articulated it). When you change the meaning of a long established institution like marriage, ie to now include same sex unions, the process that led to that initial change could then be replicated over and over to include other interpretations. I dont know if the Greens or anyone else have specifically raised the issue of pologamy but if that is true the Bernadi's comments are completely vindicated.
 
Xsess said:
Why the outrage, his is a perfectly valid point (even if you disagree with how he articulated it). When you change the meaning of a long established institution like marriage, ie to now include same sex unions, the process that led to that initial change could then be replicated over and over to include other interpretations. I dont know if the Greens or anyone else have specifically raised the issue of pologamy but if that is true the Bernadi's comments are completely vindicated.
Click to expand...


What process - you mean a Bill being introduced to parliament and needing to pass both houses?
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Admiral Byng said:
What process - you mean a Bill being introduced to parliament and needing to pass both houses?
Click to expand...

Correct. I dunno what % of Australian people are gay but it isn't particulary big. Yet the gay marriage lobby seems to be moving towards securing a signature reform of the marriage act. Why couldn't those methods be replicated for recognition of other interpretations of marriage?
 
Xsess said:
Correct. I dunno what % of Australian people are gay but it isn't particulary big. Yet the gay marriage lobby seems to be moving towards securing a signature reform of the marriage act. Why couldn't those methods be replicated for recognition of other interpretations of marriage?
Click to expand...


Because I don't think they would succeed. There's a big difference between marriage between two people and three or more. It's not some inevitable natural progression to go from gay marriage between couples to allowing polygamy. Nor is it necessarily the case that the gay marriage lobby would automatically support any push for polygamy. They are different things, and they should be seen as such. It's a bit simplistic for conservatives like Bernardi to view all non-husband/wife relationships as being all the same.
 
greennick said:
I thought he was saying someone was putting it forward to the Greens?
Click to expand...

Either way he's stretching things a bit thinking gay marriage is the thing edge of the wedge. Someone should draw up a legit looking proposal for legalising bestiality just to wind him up a bit more.

In the mean time, someone is claiming this is him posting online:

http://corybernardisaidwhat.wordpress.com/
 
Docker Clint said:
Either way he's stretching things a bit thinking gay marriage is the thing edge of the wedge. Someone should draw up a legit looking proposal for legalising bestiality just to wind him up a bit more.

In the mean time, someone is claiming this is him posting online:

http://corybernardisaidwhat.wordpress.com/
Click to expand...

Totally agree. It is just a way to justify of his opinion IMO.
 
Whilst I have a lot of contempt for Cory Bernardi, people here seem to be a little naive about how politics works. Voters don't disappear when someone disendorses a candidate that represents their views.

Family First polled 4% in the SA Senate race in 2010. If having Cory Bernardi top of the Liberal ticket prevents another Steve Fielding getting elected - especially in the coming parliament, where it appears that minor parties in the Senate will be very important - then I'm all in favour of it.

Let him mouth off in the upper house all he likes. He still has to vote how the rest of the party room tells him to.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom