Same Sex Marriage Survey

[davidc4430]

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

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-09/conservatives-to-sponsor-alternative-same-sex-marriage-bill/91...

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.

[davidc4430]

Politicians Andrew Hastie, Rick Wilson to abstain from same-sex marriage vote

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-15/wa-politicians-to-ignore-same-sex-marriage-result/9154656

What happened to the....

"i was elected by the people of my seat to represent them in the parlement of australia!" these guys sprouted when winning their seats?

abstaining is not an option IMO, if 60+% of their electorate voted YES then they must vote YES to the bill when presented.

Sure they can choose to OPT OUT, by resigning and leaving the job they are being paid to do.

ITS TIME THESE MPs LEARNED WHY THEY ARE THERE!

its not a boys own club!

[davidc4430]

---

@lyndal1838 wrote:

---

@davidc4430 wrote:

---

@lyndal1838 wrote:

All that has been achieved so far is the opinion of the people that a bill should be introduced into Parliament to change the current Marriage Laws.

The devil will be in the detail.....no-one can guarantee that the bill will pass until the full bill is available for perusal.

---

are you saying,

the people have had their say,

now,

let the games begin?

i sure wouldnt want to be in a liberal seat if they drag this out more than a couple of months

---

That pretty much sums it up David.

The vote did not give anyone a right to change the Law.....just the opportunity to introduce a bill into the Parliament.

I heard Mathius Cormann tonight saying that the discussions will start tomorrow about what should and should not be in the bill....and the trade offs that will be involved.   There is still the potential for the bill to be rejected by Parliament.

---

if the liberal/nats start playing games with this, they run the risk of being absolutly decimated at the next fed election.

if thats not allready a likely result.

over 7 million respondents to this stupid survey have clearly told them, make it happen ASAP!

we are tired of the games.

dont muck us about, just do it.

once you go to the PEOPLE you are stuffed, you have no choice.

[springyzone]

---

@lyndal1838 wrote:

---

@davidc4430 wrote:

---

@lyndal1838 wrote:

All that has been achieved so far is the opinion of the people that a bill should be introduced into Parliament to change the current Marriage Laws.

The devil will be in the detail.....no-one can guarantee that the bill will pass until the full bill is available for perusal.

---

are you saying,

the people have had their say,

now,

let the games begin?

i sure wouldnt want to be in a liberal seat if they drag this out more than a couple of months

---

That pretty much sums it up David.

The vote did not give anyone a right to change the Law.....just the opportunity to introduce a bill into the Parliament.

I heard Mathius Cormann tonight saying that the discussions will start tomorrow about what should and should not be in the bill....and the trade offs that will be involved.   There is still the potential for the bill to be rejected by Parliament.

---

The survey was just a survey. It wasn't even compulsory so all we can say is the majority of people who cared enough to vote said yes.

In itself, as you say, it does not commit politicians to a change of law.

Don't forget there was a referendum in Britain & there are still continuing problems with Brexit.

My personal opinion though is we will see a legal change & the politicians had every intention of making the legal change. The only reason they followed through with the survey (which they did not technically have to have) was because they knew very well that some  electorates with high migrant numbers would be likely to be very heavy no vote areas. I suppose for politicians to be true to their electorate, they should vote in tune with their electorate but if, for instance, they are Labor party candidates, they can at least say they are carrying out the wishes of the survey etc if they vote yes.

[davidc4430]

thats exactly how i see it, now they have seat by seat results, the pollies should vote in acordence with their constituences wishes.

not along party lines.

after all thats how they got to be pollies.

on this issue, they decided they coulnt decide without asking us, now we have told them what we want.

so IMO the MPs should now vote acording to how the people who put them there have said.

seats that voted NO, vote no to the bill

seats that voted YES, vote yes to the bill.

but saying you wont vote, not on IMO.

[lyndal1838]

There is no doubt that there will be a bill presented to Parliament to change the Marriage Act....that is a no brainer.  The question is whether there are enough protections in that Bill to satisfy those that are inclined to vote against it....the citizens who voted No.

It really is not as black and white as saying that SSM is now legal in Australia.

[davidc4430]

Ministers at odds over whether to include religious protections in same-sex marriage bill

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-19/split-in-turnbull-government-over-religious-amendments-to-ssm-...

will Big Mal have the Balls to stare down his puppeters and make SSM legal or will this just get drowned in endless redrafts.

by the time its ready to be voted on there will be no mention of SSM in it.

[lyndal1838]

I told you it was a no brainer....the people have said they want SSM legalised but there is no guarantee that the bill will ever get through Parliament.   There is a lot more involved than just saying yes to SSM.

[tezza2844]

---

@davidc4430 wrote:

Ministers at odds over whether to include religious protections in same-sex marriage bill

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-19/split-in-turnbull-government-over-religious-amendments-to-ssm-...

will Big Mal have the Balls to stare down his puppeters and make SSM legal or will this just get drowned in endless redrafts.

by the time its ready to be voted on there will be no mention of SSM in it.

---

How long before there will a discrimination case filed by heterosexual religious person against a SSM beliverer for refusing them not supplying them a service the H-R wants to deny the SSM"s

[davidc4430]

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull's failure to remember a single AC/DC song lights up Twitter

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-20/acdc-malcolm-turnbull-gets-a-helping-hand-from-twitter/9172086

in malcolms mind "hmm, AC/DC? must be a trick SSM question, what to do, how do i get out of this without looking stupid? damn! i know, i'll hit it back at them!"

[this-one-time-at-bandcamp]

I can't believe this would even come up.  "Can you tune up my hoopty? By the way, I hate gays"..........