[urlhttp://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/calls-for-samesex-marriage-bill-to-be-renamed-the-definition-of-marriage-bill/news-story/428f6c6fffe03be4d1463d9e0627aee6][/url]

EMBATTLED human rights chief Gillian Triggs is now calling for the “Same-Sex Marriage” bill to be renamed because it discriminates against people who don’t identify as a man or woman.

In a show of political correctness gone mad, the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), wants it changed to the “Definition of Marriage” bill.

“The draft title of the Act unnecessarily and inaccurately excludes couples which are neither ‘the union of a man and a woman’ nor ‘same sex’,’’ the federal government agency has told a Senate ­inquiry into the bill.

“The proposed amendments to the Marriage Act would enable two people to marry irrespective of their sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status.

“This would also include couples in which one or both parties have something other than ‘male’ or ‘female’ recorded on their birth certificate.’’

The draft bill redefines marriage as the “union of two people, to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life’’.

A Senate committee is holding a public inquiry into the legislation, which would come into force only if Australians vote to legalise same-sex marriage in a plebiscite.


really is this really what this women gets paid for???>..


surely we still have many other issues for more urgent than this that should be on the Human Rights agenda...


this women is making a pure mockery of the whole thing.

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2017 at 10:23am:

[urlhttp://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/calls-for-samesex-marriage-bill-to-be-renamed-the-definition-of-marriage-bill/news-story/428f6c6fffe03be4d1463d9e0627aee6][/url] really is this really what this women gets paid for???>.. surely we still have many other issues for more urgent than this that should be on the Human Rights agenda... this women is making a pure mockery of the whole thing.

ditto

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2017 at 10:23am:

[urlhttp://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/calls-for-samesex-marriage-bill-to-be-renamed-the-definition-of-marriage-bill/news-story/428f6c6fffe03be4d1463d9e0627aee6][/url] EMBATTLED human rights chief Gillian Triggs is now calling for the “Same-Sex Marriage” bill to be renamed because it discriminates against people who don’t identify as a man or woman. In a show of political correctness gone mad, the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), wants it changed to the “Definition of Marriage” bill. “The draft title of the Act unnecessarily and inaccurately excludes couples which are neither ‘the union of a man and a woman’ nor ‘same sex’,’’ the federal government agency has told a Senate ­inquiry into the bill. “The proposed amendments to the Marriage Act would enable two people to marry irrespective of their sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status. “This would also include couples in which one or both parties have something other than ‘male’ or ‘female’ recorded on their birth certificate.’’ The draft bill redefines marriage as the “union of two people, to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life’’. A Senate committee is holding a public inquiry into the legislation, which would come into force only if Australians vote to legalise same-sex marriage in a plebiscite. really is this really what this women gets paid for???>.. surely we still have many other issues for more urgent than this that should be on the Human Rights agenda... this women is making a pure mockery of the whole thing.

There problem is wide spread in post industrial societies. The lack of survival imperatives leads to boredom, whinging, obesity and a sense of being in a persecuted minority.

issuevoter wrote on Jan 27^th, 2017 at 1:38pm:

cods wrote on Jan 26th, 2017 at 10:23am: [urlhttp://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/calls-for-samesex-marriage-bill-to-be-renamed-the-definition-of-marriage-bill/news-story/428f6c6fffe03be4d1463d9e0627aee6][/url] EMBATTLED human rights chief Gillian Triggs is now calling for the “Same-Sex Marriage” bill to be renamed because it discriminates against people who don’t identify as a man or woman. In a show of political correctness gone mad, the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), wants it changed to the “Definition of Marriage” bill. “The draft title of the Act unnecessarily and inaccurately excludes couples which are neither ‘the union of a man and a woman’ nor ‘same sex’,’’ the federal government agency has told a Senate ­inquiry into the bill. “The proposed amendments to the Marriage Act would enable two people to marry irrespective of their sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status. “This would also include couples in which one or both parties have something other than ‘male’ or ‘female’ recorded on their birth certificate.’’ The draft bill redefines marriage as the “union of two people, to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life’’. A Senate committee is holding a public inquiry into the legislation, which would come into force only if Australians vote to legalise same-sex marriage in a plebiscite. really is this really what this women gets paid for???>.. surely we still have many other issues for more urgent than this that should be on the Human Rights agenda... this women is making a pure mockery of the whole thing. There problem is wide spread in post industrial societies. The lack of survival imperatives leads to boredom, whinging, obesity and a sense of being in a persecuted minority.

One way I've heard it said,

It's the sht you worry about when you have nothing left to worry about. When you can walk into a supermarket and chose from 50 different types of breakfast cereals, you start making up new gender pronouns.

issuevoter wrote on Jan 27^th, 2017 at 1:38pm:

There problem is wide spread in post industrial societies. The lack of survival imperatives leads to boredom, whinging, obesity and a sense of being in a persecuted minority

so true..I want to get hold of some folks on here and give them a good shaking..just to see if they actually are not robots....

they whine about nothing.. call everyone names .like rtards....stir up hatred just for the hell of it...

what is it? are they afraid or incapable of saying anything nice....

I started a thread and in the first post almost it was turned into a lets hate cods and Trump thread...

it was as if they were on standby.....

when I complained they got worse... ::) ::) ::)

this women Triggs....seems to be of the same caliber..

nit picking trivia why is she still there?.

cods wrote on Jan 26^th, 2017 at 10:23am:

[urlhttp://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/calls-for-samesex-marriage-bill-to-be-renamed-the-definition-of-marriage-bill/news-story/428f6c6fffe03be4d1463d9e0627aee6][/url] EMBATTLED human rights chief Gillian Triggs is now calling for the “Same-Sex Marriage” bill to be renamed because it discriminates against people who don’t identify as a man or woman. In a show of political correctness gone mad, the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), wants it changed to the “Definition of Marriage” bill. “The draft title of the Act unnecessarily and inaccurately excludes couples which are neither ‘the union of a man and a woman’ nor ‘same sex’,’’ the federal government agency has told a Senate ­inquiry into the bill. “The proposed amendments to the Marriage Act would enable two people to marry irrespective of their sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status. “This would also include couples in which one or both parties have something other than ‘male’ or ‘female’ recorded on their birth certificate.’’ The draft bill redefines marriage as the “union of two people, to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life’’. A Senate committee is holding a public inquiry into the legislation, which would come into force only if Australians vote to legalise same-sex marriage in a plebiscite. really is this really what this women gets paid for???>.. surely we still have many other issues for more urgent than this that should be on the Human Rights agenda... this women is making a pure mockery of the whole thing.

This will turn into yet another shocking waste of money.   They can identify as mushrooms for all I care but the simple fact remains they are either male or female and if they don't identify as either why would they want to get married?

Human rights my eye!  Sack her.   She makes a mockery of "human rights".

Black Orchid wrote on Jan 27^th, 2017 at 3:27pm:

cods wrote on Jan 26th, 2017 at 10:23am: [urlhttp://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/calls-for-samesex-marriage-bill-to-be-renamed-the-definition-of-marriage-bill/news-story/428f6c6fffe03be4d1463d9e0627aee6][/url] EMBATTLED human rights chief Gillian Triggs is now calling for the “Same-Sex Marriage” bill to be renamed because it discriminates against people who don’t identify as a man or woman. In a show of political correctness gone mad, the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), wants it changed to the “Definition of Marriage” bill. “The draft title of the Act unnecessarily and inaccurately excludes couples which are neither ‘the union of a man and a woman’ nor ‘same sex’,’’ the federal government agency has told a Senate ­inquiry into the bill. “The proposed amendments to the Marriage Act would enable two people to marry irrespective of their sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status. “This would also include couples in which one or both parties have something other than ‘male’ or ‘female’ recorded on their birth certificate.’’ The draft bill redefines marriage as the “union of two people, to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life’’. A Senate committee is holding a public inquiry into the legislation, which would come into force only if Australians vote to legalise same-sex marriage in a plebiscite. really is this really what this women gets paid for???>.. surely we still have many other issues for more urgent than this that should be on the Human Rights agenda... this women is making a pure mockery of the whole thing. This will turn into yet another shocking waste of money.   They can identify as mushrooms for all I care but the simple fact remains they are either male or female and if they don't identify as either why would they want to get married? Human rights my eye!  Sack her.   She makes a mockery of "human rights".

I dont know about any other depts but the one my daughter works in  ..

its all they talk about...even have signs up in the ladies toilets about transgender men being allowed to change in their space....they have even been told not to make eye contact when walking the corridors..lolol...could be even trickier if Triggs gets her way with this one... ;D ;D ;D

It's hard to imagine that things could ever get more ridiculous than they are now.

No wonder the public service is in such bad shape.  They only appear to want to employ minority groups and those who cannot speak English.

Why no eye contact?   Is there a new law "don't look at transgender's"?

Black Orchid wrote on Jan 27^th, 2017 at 3:35pm:

It's hard to imagine that things could ever get more ridiculous than they are now. No wonder the public service is in such bad shape.  They only appear to want to employ minority groups and those who cannot speak English. Why no eye contact?   Is there a new law "don't look at transgender's"?

  I suspect something to do with respecting the rights/sensitivities of transgenders. They cannot be wrapped up in cotton wool they have to merge into mainstream. Just a fact of life. The Public service is an equal opportunity employer. Trans people would fall into this category being a minority group.

Trump would know what to do...

he wouldn't put up with such retardedness...

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Jan 27^th, 2017 at 3:58pm:

Trump would know what to do... he wouldn't put up with such retardedness...

Nor should we!

these are the 2014 Gender options for Facebook..


Quote:

The 21 new options for UK users Asexual Female to male trans man Female to male transgender man Female to male transsexual man F2M Gender neutral Hermaphrodite Intersex man Intersex person Intersex woman Male to female trans woman Male to female transgender woman Male to female transsexual woman Man M2F Polygender T* man T* woman Two* person Two-spirit person Woman The list of the 50 previous gender options Agender Androgyne Androgynes Androgynous Bigender Cis Cis Female Cis Male Cis Man Cis Woman Cisgender Cisgender Female Cisgender Male Cisgender Man Cisgender Woman Female to Male FTM Gender Fluid Gender Nonconforming Gender Questioning Gender Variant Genderqueer Intersex Male to Female MTF Neither Neutrois Non-binary Other Pangender Trans Trans Female Trans Male Trans Man Trans Person Trans*Female Trans*Male Trans*Man Trans*Person Trans*Woman Transexual Transexual Female Transexual Male Transexual Man Transexual Person Transexual Woman Transgender Female Transgender Person Transmasculine Two-spirit

I believe that there are over 100 Gender options on FB now...

we need to get these left wits out of any position of power.. they are mentally deranged and unsuitable for any position of authority... Triggs is a classic example.. Merkel is another ... along with a list of dickless males in positions making these sick changes..

and also putting social engineering into out schools..

they are sick..  >:(

Wow what a list.  Bizarre!

You left off "undecided"    :D

In Canada which has enshrined in legislation the use of correct gender pronouns, in theory you could be sued for not using someones requested pronoun. And people have the right to change their preferred pronoun depending on the fluidity of their sexuality from one minute to the next.

Agnes wrote on Jan 27^th, 2017 at 3:55pm:

Black Orchid wrote on Jan 27th, 2017 at 3:35pm: It's hard to imagine that things could ever get more ridiculous than they are now. No wonder the public service is in such bad shape.  They only appear to want to employ minority groups and those who cannot speak English. Why no eye contact?   Is there a new law "don't look at transgender's"?   I suspect something to do with respecting the rights/sensitivities of transgenders. They cannot be wrapped up in cotton wool they have to merge into mainstream. Just a fact of life. The Public service is an equal opportunity employer. Trans people would fall into this category being a minority group.

when someone arrives at work dressed like a man very male looking...goes into the ladies and comes out dressed in a mini skirt and high heels...its hard not to be surprised...he/she even changes the voice...now to each his own..its their life..I couldnt careless what they wear....but what if someone is a staunch nudist and wants to be free to flaunt it everywhere... ::) ::) ::)...where do we draw the line...there seems to be no end to it.

Black Orchid wrote on Jan 27^th, 2017 at 4:10pm:

Wow what a list.  Bizarre! You left off "undecided"    :D

what about "IT"

Gordon wrote on Jan 27^th, 2017 at 4:22pm:

In Canada which has enshrined in legislation the use of correct gender pronouns, in theory you could be sued for not using someones requested pronoun. And people have the right to change their preferred pronoun depending on the fluidity of their sexuality from one minute to the next.

Does that include French Canadian, where everything has gender?

issuevoter wrote on Jan 27^th, 2017 at 5:55pm:

Gordon wrote on Jan 27th, 2017 at 4:22pm: In Canada which has enshrined in legislation the use of correct gender pronouns, in theory you could be sued for not using someones requested pronoun. And people have the right to change their preferred pronoun depending on the fluidity of their sexuality from one minute to the next. Does that include French Canadian, where everything has gender?

in that case I trust I never meet one....can I say that? without being sued?

issuevoter wrote on Jan 27^th, 2017 at 5:55pm:

Gordon wrote on Jan 27th, 2017 at 4:22pm: In Canada which has enshrined in legislation the use of correct gender pronouns, in theory you could be sued for not using someones requested pronoun. And people have the right to change their preferred pronoun depending on the fluidity of their sexuality from one minute to the next. Does that include French Canadian, where everything has gender?

A few more won't hurt. Le, la, lo, lu and li? I think we can credit the norse(vikings) for our lack of sex nouns. Italian, French and Spanish still has them as others probably still do, Portuguese probably.

edit: Just googled. Grammatical gender
This system is used in approximately one quarter of the world's languages.

Jordan Peterson is leading the charge against this sht in Canada. Oh and if you haven't met Joe Rogan yet.....

http://podcasts.joerogan.net/podcasts/jordan-peterson

Need another Country and Western song....

(dum, dum, dum) ...
Me and mah dawg went walking, looking to find a bone,
Somewhere he could take a crap, before we headed home,
On the road we passed a carriage,
And in it Gillian Triggs,
She offered we both marriage,
And to totally share our digs.....

Marriage ain't the way it used to be..
Once upon a time it was me and she.
But since they changed the rules,
It's just a place for fools,
You take a vow, no matter how,
You fit as man and wife,
No-one now gets married unless they're strange.....

(slide guitar and fiddle come in)....