on 09-11-2017 09:50 AM
a week out from result day and allready cracks apearing on the govt side,
Same-sex marriage: 'More than a dozen' conservatives prepare alternative bill to protect religious freedoms
any chance a simple change to the law "IF" the survey says YES, looks doomed allready.
we were promised, if we allowed this stupid survey to be held and if it was a yes result then it would be a simple change to the wording of the act and that will be that.
oh but here come the 'well, how about we add this, and this, oh and we dont want that.....ect ect.
again i fully expect malcom to be a 'yes' man, saying yes to whatever the guys keeping him in the PMs chair say.
15-11-2017 09:15 AM - edited 15-11-2017 09:19 AM
It's ironic really as many who push the yes vote probably also push the open migration barrow
Once again, you're offering not facts, but your opinion......where is the evidence that a pro-gay individual is prone to want unlimited immigration, and what does this have to do with same-sex marriage?
I could just as easily claim that those who push the no vote probably also push for deportation of anyone who isn't a white Australian.........
on 15-11-2017 09:23 AM
"I guess the only constant in any society is change, isn't it. I'm pretty sure the yes vote will get up & the sky won't fall.
I'm much more worried about the social changes further down the track if moderate islamic thought gets pushed to the side."
so we wouldnt want anyone getting into power (govt) with alegiance to a foriegn country like a muslim country? so we wouldnt want to change our constitution to allow dual citizenship would we?
as to SSM debacle, i predict 12 months after the govt changes the laws to allow SSM it will be a non issue to 90% of aussies.
i'm sure there will be at least 10% of citizens will still be hiding under their kitchen tables waiting for the shy to fall.
15-11-2017 09:34 AM - edited 15-11-2017 09:37 AM
@this-one-time-at-bandcamp wrote:Why are gays so addement that they want to change the meaning of a word to suit their own purposes at the expense of the vast majority ?
How is it at the expense of the vast majority?
The reason they are so adamant, is for millenia they have been shoved into a dark closet, persecuted shunned. It is a new world coming.
Unless you're gay, how is the terminology hurtful or of an impact to you? That's what defines the haters, like the Alabamians vowing they would rather vote for a pedophile than a democrat.........pure unreasoning hate.
I have laid out why I think the word marriage is important to hetrosexuals, in my last post, but will give a recap for your benefit.
We are asked to acknowledge and respect the fact that being gay is an integral part of a homosexuals personal identity and being. I agree with this totally, so hopefully we are all still on the same page so far.
What is being forgotton in the debate is that being heterosexual is just as important to the personal identity of the 98 % of the population who are not gay and this should be equelly respected by the gay community. This includes the tradition over hundreds of years of the word marriage indicating the legal union of man and woman. Its about respect. Hetros are being asked to respect gay relationships ( and fair enough ), but gays are not showing equel respect for hetros relationships and traditions.
All languages including English have clear terms for family relations based on gender. Mother ( female ) Father ( male ) Wife ( female ) Husband ( male ) Son, Daughter Niece Nephew, marriage ( between male and female ) you get the picture. ALL BASED ON GENDER !!!
Some of us object to the lack of respect shown by gays to the importance of the tradition of marriage to the 98% of the population who are not homosexual. If gays want a new, different but similar, legally recognised union, great. A bit more long term, commitment and love in the current world cant be a bad thing. Just show a bit of respect for the majorities traditions and relationships and call it somthing else !!!
on 15-11-2017 09:39 AM
@springyzone wrote:
@this-one-time-at-bandcamp wrote:Why are gays so addement that they want to change the meaning of a word to suit their own purposes at the expense of the vast majority ?
How is it at the expense of the vast majority?
The reason they are so adamant, is for millenia they have been shoved into a dark closet, persecuted shunned. It is a new world coming.
Unless you're gay, how is the terminology hurtful or of an impact to you? That's what defines the haters, like the Alabamians vowing they would rather vote for a pedophile than a democrat.........pure unreasoning hate.
For some it may be about prejudice but for many others it isn't, it is about changing the current legal definition of marriage.
It's true that homosexual people have faced prejudice over different centuries & cultures, but the current gays haven't, they haven't been on earth that long & in fact I would say that right here/right now, is probably the best place gays have ever been in. That's not to say it is perfect & couldn't be improved, but compared to even a generation ago, it is a pretty good place.
Yes, it is a new world coming but be careful what we wish for. I see things as like a see saw that is hardly ever evenly balanced. It falls one way then there is a reaction and it tips back in the other direction a bit. We're seeing things tipping towards a breakdown of traditional sexual attitudes-maybe because sex & pregnancy don't have to go hand in hand now & in fact, people don't actually need kids for their future survival or for them to work on the farm etc
What I find interesting though is at the moment, world wide, we are also seeing the see saw moving from a very liberal Islamic view (typical in many places around 1970s,1980s) to a much more radical/fundamentalist view. The new wave of attitude is even moving over Indonesia.
I'm not saying all muslims are members of ISIS or any such thing, just that there is a more traditional attitude on the rise, a movement of the see saw. If muslim numbers here go up a lot (and they probably will, as muslims have a more traditional attitude to having family and it is more the norm to have 4 or more children), we may see a push for laws to change again and there's no reason why they wouldn't, to fall in line with community opinion.
It's ironic really as many who push the yes vote probably also push the open migration barrow but it may bounce back to bite them. In several countries in the Islamic world, gays have been thrown off rooftops.
I guess the only constant in any society is change, isn't it. I'm pretty sure the yes vote will get up & the sky won't fall.
I'm much more worried about the social changes further down the track if moderate islamic thought gets pushed to the side.
Very wise and thoughtful post springy.
on 15-11-2017 10:37 AM
Same-sex marriage survey: Australia says Yes to SSM
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-15/same-sex-marriage-australia-says-yes-to-ssm/9150344
on 15-11-2017 10:53 AM
interesting that in Tony Abbott’s electorate there was a 75% yes vote
on 15-11-2017 11:42 AM
@k1ooo-slr-sales wrote:interesting that in Tony Abbott’s electorate there was a 75% yes vote
well, theres proof the vote was rigged!
lets shelve this survey!
15-11-2017 02:17 PM - edited 15-11-2017 02:20 PM
@this-one-time-at-bandcamp wrote:It's ironic really as many who push the yes vote probably also push the open migration barrow
Once again, you're offering not facts, but your opinion......where is the evidence that a pro-gay individual is prone to want unlimited immigration, and what does this have to do with same-sex marriage?
I could just as easily claim that those who push the no vote probably also push for deportation of anyone who isn't a white Australian.........
It's an opinion and obviously not every person who voted yes for gay marriage would vote for open immigration but they are definitely both stances that are high up on the leftist agenda. At least in Melbourne they are.
So nope the 2 opnions don't always go together but they are more likely to go together.
I haven't actually said any side is all right or wrong as such, just that these are the social changes we're going through at the moment.
on 15-11-2017 03:17 PM
i wish they would hurry up and get the law changed so i can marry Foo, i seem to recall it being said if we allow SSM people will be marrying there dogs!
BTW, your all invited to the wooftuls, 1+ pet seating.
on 15-11-2017 03:35 PM
Well that was a lot of fuss about nothing