Marriage equality debate - The plebiscite is on its way. (Cont in Pt 3)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Personally, I'm more than happy for SSM to be legal. Kind of staggering that it isn't. Cannot for the life of me fathom why people would vote against it - other than due to referencing some sort of archaic Christian dogma/horseshit. Who actually gives a f@*k? It's such a non-issue.

Pardon my ignorance, what actually happens with a plebiscite? As in does it need a certain number of votes to make it valid?
It's a non-binding opinion poll. DOesn't matter how many vote, Parliament doesn't have to recognise the $122m they are wasting.
 
As I said serious question, I've never understood only following some aspects. The religious people I know have never been able to explain why they're against SSM due to the bible, but don't follow most of the other parts.


Wasn't your initial post an attack at everyone who disagrees with you...

I haven't even seen you discuss the topic once.
You win.....
Now your arguing with yourself.....
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Personally, I'm more than happy for SSM to be legal. Kind of staggering that it isn't. Cannot for the life of me fathom why people would vote against it - other than due to referencing some sort of archaic Christian dogma/horseshit. Who actually gives a f@*k? It's such a non-issue.

Pardon my ignorance, what actually happens with a plebiscite? As in does it need a certain number of votes to make it valid?
It called a democracy.....
 
I vote No.
You vote Yes............
Well at least you got that correct...
With the age demographic of dees fans, I'm surprised there's not more like you.
 
Your defensiveness demonstrates I hit something right on... take a breath champ, the internet tough guy act is done to death.

I explicitly explained the reasoning to you. You've ignored it and kept ranting. The assumption of you assuming he was genuine is that you became pissy about a minor point I made, over what he said.

So now you're saying you don't know or care if he's genuine but you don't like a piece of the logic I used to say he's not? Strange to take umbrage to that.

You didn't explain your reasoning at all. All you did was assume that a poster wasn't genuine because he couldn't spell. Beyond that I just pointed out that it was sh*tty logic on your behalf. Your explanation was only to make further assumptions about what I may or may not be thinking about it all. You have the most *ed logic of anyone I have encountered on big footy - and I have been on here a long time. Explain your reasoning, and stop dodging the simple question. So, what is your reasoning behind assuming that someone isn't genuine based upon their spelling?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

As I said serious question, I've never understood only following some aspects. The religious people I know have never been able to explain why they're against SSM due to the bible, but don't follow most of the other parts.


Wasn't your initial post an attack at everyone who disagrees with you...

I haven't even seen you discuss the topic once.

Go to the Pell thread to see why. I'm not game to post in there. I'm a catholic which paints me as fair game to the rabid left.
 
You didn't explain your reasoning at all. All you did was assume that a poster wasn't genuine because he couldn't spell. Beyond that I just pointed out that it was sh*tty logic on your behalf. Your explanation was only to make further assumptions about what I may or may not be thinking about it all. You have the most ******ed logic of anyone I have encountered on big footy - and I have been on here a long time. Explain your reasoning, and stop dodging the simple question. So, what is your reasoning behind assuming that someone isn't genuine based upon their spelling?
You literally quoted the post...:
He said we know it's genuine.
He jumped into a discussion about SSM to tell everyone he disagrees then threw in that he knows gays and that AIDS killed someone close to him, to bignote an opinion. If you want to believe everything strangers claim online that's fine, most people look at context to judge things though.


It's not a spelling nazi. Please see above.

Apologies if I don't bignote my opinion by using the deceased, or don't have the ability to spell very basic words that have apparently had a huge impact on me.

I like it. A guy can use someone's death to bignote his opinion online, but no one can question it.

Everything online is obviously therefore fact. Never ever change bigfooty.
Sorry I didn't realise I needed to point out the logic, that you had quoted and responded to, and tell you, that's the logic...
 
Good night BIGOT.......
Capital letters aren't evidence old fella. How good is it that we will most likely see SSM legalised before the dees win another flag? ;)

Go to the Pell thread to see why. I'm not game to post in there. I'm a catholic which paints me as fair game to the rabid left.
So you'll post that it's because your catholic, but not elaborate, because people who'll attack you for being catholic. That logic doesn't exist, you've already said it's because of your Catholicism and we're hardly attacked for it, you're now being asked follow ups on that.
 
Capital letters aren't evidence old fella. How good is it that we will most likely see SSM legalised before the dees win another flag? ;)


So you'll post that it's because your catholic, but not elaborate, because people who'll attack you for being catholic. That logic doesn't exist, you've already said it's because of your Catholicism and we're hardly attacked for it, you're now being asked follow ups on that.
Good night bigot.....
 
You literally quoted the post...:
Sorry I didn't realise I needed to point out the logic, that you had quoted and responded to, and tell you, that's the logic...

I could not have been ANY more specific. FMD. You are *ed, and you didn't explain your reasoning behind your assumption that Cold Sober isn't genuine based on the fact that he cannot spell (according to you). I am not surprised you couldn't explain your reasoning either. It is sh*t logic. And now you are stuck running around in circles trying to escape it. In future, just admit that you were wrong and save us both the time. I hope the rest of your night goes a little better for you.
 
So you'll post that it's because your catholic, but not elaborate, because people who'll attack you for being catholic. That logic doesn't exist, you've already said it's because of your Catholicism and we're hardly attacked for it, you're now being asked follow ups on that.

When the person who runs this forum is assertively anti-Catholic, it's best not to poke your toe into some threads.
 
Good night bigot.....
Nawwwwww poor old man cracked the sads

I could not have been ANY more specific. FMD. You are ******ed, and you didn't explain your reasoning behind your assumption that Cold Sober isn't genuine based on the fact that he cannot spell (according to you). I am not surprised you couldn't explain your reasoning either. It is sh*t logic. And now you are stuck running around in circles trying to escape it. In future, just admit that you were wrong and save us both the time. I hope the rest of your night goes a little better for you.
Again, you quote it, then say it's not there. This is pretty pathetic.

We get it, you just want to abuse for the sake of abuse, it's pretty sad but not completely rare for old blokes to act like that online.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top