Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 9
Send Topic Print
Voting NO is the way to go (Read 8677 times)
Dnarever
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 57063
Here
Gender: male
Re: Voting NO is the way to go
Reply #60 - Sep 16th, 2017 at 11:31pm
 
Grendel wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 6:42pm:
Dnarever wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 6:38pm:
TheFunPolice wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 5:28pm:
Dnarever wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 7:53am:
I don't get voting against fairness for no benefit to anybody, just to be nasty it seems..

You haven't listened to anything in this debate: it's about the institution called marriage and the fact that the subject of ssm never was an institution for very real reasons.


institution called marriage


Marriage is an institution, like a sanatorium ? Does not seem a very good reason to continue to demonise and support discrimination against people just because you do not approve of the sexuality that they were born with.

Good grief...
Quote:
in·sti·tu·tion

/ˌinstəˈt(y)o͞oSH(ə)n/

noun

    1. a society or organization founded for a religious, educational, social, or similar purpose: "a certificate from a professional institution" synonyms: establishment, organization, institute, foundation, center, ... more
    2. an established law, practice, or custom: "the institution of marriage" synonyms: practice, custom, convention, tradition, habit, ... more


Who is discriminating against whom?  Who is trying to appropriate a term and change its meaning, something billions have been part of for thousands of years?


There is a range of areas where the law and other arrangements currently discriminates against couples who are not married. From next of kin access in hospitals or inheritance and parenting status in some states.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Gnads
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 27649
Gender: male
Re: Voting NO is the way to go
Reply #61 - Sep 17th, 2017 at 8:47am
 
buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 12:23pm:
Yadda wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 12:03pm:
It will be unlawful, to openly, to publicly, say that you 'do not like' homosexuality.





   ... and yet ANOTHER load of BUNKUM by the "NO" camp

There is absolutely no evidence to support this ludicrous claim, either here - or any other part of the world where Marriage Equality has entered into law



Excuse the pun ... but you must go around with your head up your arse?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-07/defence-force-reservist-sacked-for-anti-ga...

This happened 2 yrs ago in Australia .... it's also happened in the US when a father David Parker went to a Lexington school to see if teachers were going to teach his kindergarten son about homosexuality and same sex marriage. When advised that he would be Parker asked that his son be able to opt out. The Principle refused because homosexuality and gay marriage was now legal in Massachusetts. When he insisted on his parental right to opt his son out the Principle called Police and he was arrested.




Back to top
 

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais
 
IP Logged
 
red baron
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 10204
Blue Mountains
Gender: male
Re: Voting NO is the way to go
Reply #62 - Sep 17th, 2017 at 9:06am
 
This Vote is a crock of the first order

Our Parliamentarians are put there to Govern the Country and take care of issues such as this

It is clear to me a conscience vote on all sides of Parliament should have been the way to go





Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Dnarever
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 57063
Here
Gender: male
Re: Voting NO is the way to go
Reply #63 - Sep 17th, 2017 at 9:07am
 
red baron wrote on Sep 17th, 2017 at 9:06am:
This Vote is a crock of the first order

Our Parliamentarians are put there to Govern the Country and take care of issues such as this

It is clear to me a conscience vote on all sides of Parliament should have been the way to go



Agree.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 79545
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male
Re: Voting NO is the way to go
Reply #64 - Sep 17th, 2017 at 10:34am
 
red baron wrote on Sep 17th, 2017 at 9:06am:
This Vote is a crock of the first order

Our Parliamentarians are put there to Govern the Country and take care of issues such as this

It is clear to me a conscience vote on all sides of Parliament should have been the way to go







Their refusal to do their job leaves us with only the will of the people expressed in a binding vote.  If the politicians had simply gone ahead and made a vote on this issue one way or the other, it would never go away.  The same can be said of a popular binding vote, but the reality is that a popular binding vote has far more weight than the parliamentary vote of a a few sycophantic, vote-seeking party people.

All the argument and name-calling and bullying doing the rounds has actually created a far greater issue of this than it should have been, and - dare I say it - the YES lobby's bullying has turned many formerly sympathetic people away.  Still - I suppose it's a good thing that the issues surrounding this single issue have had an airing.... and have alerted the thinking public to the very real dangers of certain forms of government and governance.

Poor Canada.....  Undecided

Oh - Red - be careful of wanting or expecting an elected parliament to 'govern' the country exclusively without reference to the people.... I wouldn't trust this Parliament with anything larger then a schedule of events at a school sports carnival.  I find it bizarre that such an esteemed colleague as your good self will oppose The Jackal and privatised insanity etc, which is Captain Hooknose 'governing' for you, despite you and on top of you - but then you are happy to surrender your democratic rights in areas such as this.....

It is the form of our government that is wrong at this time in history..... and their style of governance so akin to the Great Leaders of the past and present exercising some kind of 'divine right' (read Divine Right Of Elected Government) ..... we say - you do.... but then I've always been a rebel.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 17th, 2017 at 10:39am by Grappler Truth Teller Feller »  

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Voting NO is the way to go
Reply #65 - Sep 17th, 2017 at 10:40am
 
Lol
Lets say we have a Left leaning progressive Parliament...  one elected where the issue was never brought up during the election.
They vote in SSM.

IMO once that genie is out of the bottle there is no putting it back.

But lets say as a response to this parliament the next one voted in by the people is RW Conservative and they change the Act back to what it was before?

Is this to-ing and fro-ong every 3 years what you want?  Is that what you consider good governance?

Both parliaments are legitimate, aren't they?

These decisions should be put to the people not a handful of useless pollies.  A referendum or plebiscite, compulsory voting...  that which activists the ALP and Greens fought against and have now saddled us with a postal survey. Cheesy
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
The_Barnacle
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6205
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Voting NO is the way to go
Reply #66 - Sep 17th, 2017 at 11:02am
 
Grendel wrote on Sep 17th, 2017 at 10:40am:
Is this to-ing and fro-ong every 3 years what you want?  Is that what you consider good governance?

Both parliaments are legitimate, aren't they?



That won't happen. Surveys show that there is around 55% support for ssm with about 20% undecided.

Does this mean that the government postal survey will yeild the same result?
No it doesn't.

Whilst the "yes" camp have to present a case for why you should vote yes. All the "No" camp have to do is convince you not to vote yes. Convincing someone not to vote yes is a much easier thing to do as our track record of failed referendums have shown.

So now we see the "no" camp bringing up various red herrings and distrations. Claiming the victim status, claiming they are being bullied, the absurd claim that ssm will result in the end of civilisation. There are also many people sympathetic to the ssm cause who are already sick and tired of the media debate.

Tony Abbott knew all this when he proposed the plebisite and he knew it was the best way to derail the whole campaign.

My prediction is that the "no" camp will win.
I will be boycotting the survey
Back to top
 

The Right Wing only believe in free speech when they agree with what is being said.
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Voting NO is the way to go
Reply #67 - Sep 17th, 2017 at 11:32am
 
Rubbish....  you can attach that to any point you just made.

the issue would be settled now if not for Labor and the Greens and Abbott was the only one wise enough to let the people decide.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 17th, 2017 at 12:28pm by Grendel »  
 
IP Logged
 
The_Barnacle
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6205
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Voting NO is the way to go
Reply #68 - Sep 17th, 2017 at 11:34am
 
Grendel wrote on Sep 17th, 2017 at 11:32am:
Rubbish....  you cant attach that to any point you just made.

the issue would be settled now if not for Labor and the Greens and Abbott was the only one wise enough to let the people decide.


It's not binding
The people arn't deciding anything
Its a postal SURVEY
Back to top
 

The Right Wing only believe in free speech when they agree with what is being said.
 
IP Logged
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 79545
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male
Re: Voting NO is the way to go
Reply #69 - Sep 17th, 2017 at 12:15pm
 
The_Barnacle wrote on Sep 17th, 2017 at 11:34am:
Grendel wrote on Sep 17th, 2017 at 11:32am:
Rubbish....  you cant attach that to any point you just made.

the issue would be settled now if not for Labor and the Greens and Abbott was the only one wise enough to let the people decide.


It's not binding
The people arn't deciding anything
Its a postal SURVEY


Meaning it still won't be settled - nor will it be settled by a vote from a vote-seeking Parliament who need the gay and gay supporters votes...

UNLESS the people decide, this will remain an open festering sore and will never go away.  Even then it will not, but at least the people will have spoken, and have not simply been handed a rubbish decision from above as determined by their 'betters' who know better....

All these years of trying to get rid of elitism and the rule of the unknowing all-knowing in Parliament, and all we hear is that the politicians should make all our decisions for us because that's their right to 'govern' us and tell us what to do ... and the very ones chasing this so relentlessly are those who whine about the 'left' and the Nanny State...

Jesus God, people..... grow some balls and stand on your own two feet...
Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Voting NO is the way to go
Reply #70 - Sep 17th, 2017 at 12:29pm
 
The_Barnacle wrote on Sep 17th, 2017 at 11:34am:
Grendel wrote on Sep 17th, 2017 at 11:32am:
Rubbish....  you can attach that to any point you just made.

the issue would be settled now if not for Labor and the Greens and Abbott was the only one wise enough to let the people decide.


It's not binding
The people arn't deciding anything
Its a postal SURVEY

Not good at reading are you.
I could type it again slower if you like. Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 17th, 2017 at 5:32pm by Grendel »  
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 39928
Gender: male
Re: Voting NO is the way to go
Reply #71 - Sep 17th, 2017 at 1:30pm
 
red baron wrote on Sep 17th, 2017 at 9:06am:
This Vote is a crock of the first order

Our Parliamentarians are put there to Govern the Country and take care of issues such as this

It is clear to me a conscience vote on all sides of Parliament should have been the way to go






This not a matter of government policy but radical social change that will not be reversible by legislation.

There should have been a referendum, compulsory and binding. Bastard senate cross benches blocked it.
Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
Dnarever
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 57063
Here
Gender: male
Re: Voting NO is the way to go
Reply #72 - Sep 17th, 2017 at 7:19pm
 
Frank wrote on Sep 17th, 2017 at 1:30pm:
red baron wrote on Sep 17th, 2017 at 9:06am:
This Vote is a crock of the first order

Our Parliamentarians are put there to Govern the Country and take care of issues such as this

It is clear to me a conscience vote on all sides of Parliament should have been the way to go






This not a matter of government policy but radical social change that will not be reversible by legislation.

There should have been a referendum, compulsory and binding. Bastard senate cross benches blocked it.


And the same sex community would have got 10 X the abuse they are getting now.

This is a very bad idea.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Voting NO is the way to go
Reply #73 - Sep 17th, 2017 at 10:02pm
 
Dnarever wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 11:31pm:
Grendel wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 6:42pm:
Dnarever wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 6:38pm:
TheFunPolice wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 5:28pm:
Dnarever wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 7:53am:
I don't get voting against fairness for no benefit to anybody, just to be nasty it seems..

You haven't listened to anything in this debate: it's about the institution called marriage and the fact that the subject of ssm never was an institution for very real reasons.


institution called marriage


Marriage is an institution, like a sanatorium ? Does not seem a very good reason to continue to demonise and support discrimination against people just because you do not approve of the sexuality that they were born with.

Good grief...
Quote:
in·sti·tu·tion

/ˌinstəˈt(y)o͞oSH(ə)n/

noun

    1. a society or organization founded for a religious, educational, social, or similar purpose: "a certificate from a professional institution" synonyms: establishment, organization, institute, foundation, center, ... more
    2. an established law, practice, or custom: "the institution of marriage" synonyms: practice, custom, convention, tradition, habit, ... more


Who is discriminating against whom?  Who is trying to appropriate a term and change its meaning, something billions have been part of for thousands of years?


There is a range of areas where the law and other arrangements currently discriminates against couples who are not married. From next of kin access in hospitals or inheritance and parenting status in some states.

Discrimination is a good thing it means making a choice.... I like apples not lemons that is a choice it involves the ability to recognise and discriminate differences.
How about we discriminate for all those billions of heterosexual couples based on the fact that marriage for thousands of years has been the union of a man and a woman instead of changing it to include different sorts of relationships that can never be equal. Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
If you want other legal changes you think are not available make them.  You don't change a society based on less that .5% of it.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Dnarever
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 57063
Here
Gender: male
Re: Voting NO is the way to go
Reply #74 - Sep 17th, 2017 at 10:26pm
 
Grendel wrote on Sep 17th, 2017 at 10:02pm:
Dnarever wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 11:31pm:
Grendel wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 6:42pm:
Dnarever wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 6:38pm:
TheFunPolice wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 5:28pm:
Dnarever wrote on Sep 16th, 2017 at 7:53am:
I don't get voting against fairness for no benefit to anybody, just to be nasty it seems..

You haven't listened to anything in this debate: it's about the institution called marriage and the fact that the subject of ssm never was an institution for very real reasons.


institution called marriage


Marriage is an institution, like a sanatorium ? Does not seem a very good reason to continue to demonise and support discrimination against people just because you do not approve of the sexuality that they were born with.

Good grief...
Quote:
in·sti·tu·tion

/ˌinstəˈt(y)o͞oSH(ə)n/

noun

    1. a society or organization founded for a religious, educational, social, or similar purpose: "a certificate from a professional institution" synonyms: establishment, organization, institute, foundation, center, ... more
    2. an established law, practice, or custom: "the institution of marriage" synonyms: practice, custom, convention, tradition, habit, ... more


Who is discriminating against whom?  Who is trying to appropriate a term and change its meaning, something billions have been part of for thousands of years?


There is a range of areas where the law and other arrangements currently discriminates against couples who are not married. From next of kin access in hospitals or inheritance and parenting status in some states.

Discrimination is a good thing it means making a choice.... I like apples not lemons that is a choice it involves the ability to recognise and discriminate differences.
How about we discriminate for all those billions of heterosexual couples based on the fact that marriage for thousands of years has been the union of a man and a woman instead of changing it to include different sorts of relationships that can never be equal. Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
If you want other legal changes you think are not available make them.  You don't change a society based on less that .5% of it.




billions of heterosexual couples based on the fact that marriage for thousands of years has been the union of a man and a woman

Here you use a history of oppression and marginalization to argue for further oppression and marginalization ? Probably not the best way to go.

The Ozzie and Harriet (1950's - John Howard) view of marriage which is in itself relatively recent historically and going back to it is unlikely or would you like to go back further to  marrying to secure political alliances or ending inter-tribal warfare ?

Did you know that Nero was married to a male ?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/05/13/conservatives-say-ma...

Things have changed the last few decades this article is saying it has been the progress women have made.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 9
Send Topic Print