Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Labor, Liberal, Greens, Democrats? Here's the place to discuss.

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby Trader » Fri Aug 11, 2017 11:49 am

woodublieve12 wrote:For the people who oppose It, i am still waiting for one of them to give me a valid reason how two gay people marrying affects them?


Agreed, and equally I haven't seen a good reason why it should be changed to allow them to get married.

For mine, there is the 10% that really wants it ('the gay community'), the 10% who don't want it ('the church'), and then an 80% sitting in the middle who ultimately don't really care.

That 80% then fall into either:
a yes vote - under the premise of: it doesn't hurt me, so why not, or
a no vote - under the premise of: why fix what isn't broken.

Its a really emotive topic, but unfortunately it seems its hard to have a genuine discussion on the matter without being labeled as either a fag or a bigot.

If 'the gay community' came out with a clear an concise set of tangible benefits of allowing SSM, I recon they'd go a fair way to getting the yes vote over the line.
Danny Southern telling Plugga he's fat, I'd like to see that!
User avatar
Trader
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4202
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 1:19 pm
Has liked: 60 times
Been liked: 794 times

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby tipper » Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:00 pm

Trader wrote:
woodublieve12 wrote:For the people who oppose It, i am still waiting for one of them to give me a valid reason how two gay people marrying affects them?


Agreed, and equally I haven't seen a good reason why it should be changed to allow them to get married.

For mine, there is the 10% that really wants it ('the gay community'), the 10% who don't want it ('the church'), and then an 80% sitting in the middle who ultimately don't really care.

That 80% then fall into either:
a yes vote - under the premise of: it doesn't hurt me, so why not, or
a no vote - under the premise of: why fix what isn't broken.

Its a really emotive topic, but unfortunately it seems its hard to have a genuine discussion on the matter without being labeled as either a fag or a bigot.

If 'the gay community' came out with a clear an concise set of tangible benefits of allowing SSM, I recon they'd go a fair way to getting the yes vote over the line.


ill give you a good reason. it is discriminatory not to. simple.
tipper
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:45 am
Has liked: 359 times
Been liked: 531 times
Grassroots Team: Peake

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby Ronnie » Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:02 pm

tipper wrote:
Trader wrote:
woodublieve12 wrote:For the people who oppose It, i am still waiting for one of them to give me a valid reason how two gay people marrying affects them?


Agreed, and equally I haven't seen a good reason why it should be changed to allow them to get married.

For mine, there is the 10% that really wants it ('the gay community'), the 10% who don't want it ('the church'), and then an 80% sitting in the middle who ultimately don't really care.

That 80% then fall into either:
a yes vote - under the premise of: it doesn't hurt me, so why not, or
a no vote - under the premise of: why fix what isn't broken.

Its a really emotive topic, but unfortunately it seems its hard to have a genuine discussion on the matter without being labeled as either a fag or a bigot.

If 'the gay community' came out with a clear an concise set of tangible benefits of allowing SSM, I recon they'd go a fair way to getting the yes vote over the line.


ill give you a good reason. it is discriminatory not to. simple.


Depends whether the discrimination is justified or not. We discriminate against polygamists too, child brides etc etc. Has to be a fairly exclusive club.
Having said that it will get passed and life will go on.
Ronnie
Reserves
 
Posts: 795
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 7:57 am
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 84 times

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby Jimmy_041 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:06 pm

Magellan wrote:Jimmy's right, the plebiscite was liberal policy at the last election, so fair enough that as the party in power they sought to implement it. The reason its not going ahead is the senate, and the reason that's a cluster **** is Turnbull made a miscalculation and called the election at the wrong time. With a majority in both houses, and bada-bing, you get your plebiscite (for better or worse).


The good thing is Bovver Boy Bill will have to deal with the same problem when he gets into power
Watch him moan and scream when he doesn't get his way after he's done everything he can to **** the country to achieve personal glory
User avatar
Jimmy_041
Coach
 
 
Posts: 13981
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:30 pm
Has liked: 718 times
Been liked: 1071 times
Grassroots Team: Prince Alfred OC

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby tipper » Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:23 pm

Jimmy_041 wrote:
Magellan wrote:Jimmy's right, the plebiscite was liberal policy at the last election, so fair enough that as the party in power they sought to implement it. The reason its not going ahead is the senate, and the reason that's a cluster **** is Turnbull made a miscalculation and called the election at the wrong time. With a majority in both houses, and bada-bing, you get your plebiscite (for better or worse).


The good thing is Bovver Boy Bill will have to deal with the same problem when he gets into power
Watch him moan and scream when he doesn't get his way after he's done everything he can to **** the country to achieve personal glory


wait, are you describing Bill or Tony??
tipper
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:45 am
Has liked: 359 times
Been liked: 531 times
Grassroots Team: Peake

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby Jimmy_041 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:31 pm

tipper wrote:
Jimmy_041 wrote:
Magellan wrote:Jimmy's right, the plebiscite was liberal policy at the last election, so fair enough that as the party in power they sought to implement it. The reason its not going ahead is the senate, and the reason that's a cluster **** is Turnbull made a miscalculation and called the election at the wrong time. With a majority in both houses, and bada-bing, you get your plebiscite (for better or worse).


The good thing is Bovver Boy Bill will have to deal with the same problem when he gets into power
Watch him moan and scream when he doesn't get his way after he's done everything he can to **** the country to achieve personal glory


wait, are you describing Bill or Tony??


Scroll back a few years and I said the same thing about Abbott

Daenerys Targaryen gets it 8) No use ruling over ashes
User avatar
Jimmy_041
Coach
 
 
Posts: 13981
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:30 pm
Has liked: 718 times
Been liked: 1071 times
Grassroots Team: Prince Alfred OC

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby bennymacca » Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:03 pm

cracka wrote:While I'm for gay marriage, I'm not opposed to having a referendum on the issue. I am opposed to it being a stand alone one though. Just have it when we have the next election, could even have a couple of other topics like voluntary euthanasia.
While this is an important issue for some people, I think there are other issues that need to be dealt with first like power prices, petrol prices etc


the libs wouldnt want it to be an election issue as they know they are on the losing side of the debate. They want it to be a non-binding postal vote as they think less younger people will vote for it

Ronnie wrote:
Depends whether the discrimination is justified or not. We discriminate against polygamists too, child brides etc etc. Has to be a fairly exclusive club.
Having said that it will get passed and life will go on.


did you just equate homosexuality to paedophilia?
User avatar
bennymacca
Coach
 
 
Posts: 15028
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 12:22 pm
Has liked: 2253 times
Been liked: 1803 times
Grassroots Team: Freeling

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby Trader » Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:06 pm

bennymacca wrote:did you just equate homosexuality to paedophilia?


When it comes to the church they are often the same incident.
Danny Southern telling Plugga he's fat, I'd like to see that!
User avatar
Trader
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4202
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 1:19 pm
Has liked: 60 times
Been liked: 794 times

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby MW » Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:19 pm

Trader wrote:
bennymacca wrote:did you just equate homosexuality to paedophilia?


When it comes to the church they are often the same incident.


GTFO
MW
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12914
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 8:55 pm
Has liked: 2581 times
Been liked: 1822 times

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby cracka » Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:29 pm

MW wrote:
Trader wrote:
bennymacca wrote:did you just equate homosexuality to paedophilia?


When it comes to the church they are often the same incident.


GTFO

Apparently there are some pedos claiming it shouldn't be illegal because like homosexuals they are born that way.
cracka
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3645
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:41 am
Has liked: 458 times
Been liked: 560 times
Grassroots Team: Onkaparinga Valley

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby MW » Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:31 pm

cracka wrote:
MW wrote:
Trader wrote:
bennymacca wrote:did you just equate homosexuality to paedophilia?


When it comes to the church they are often the same incident.


GTFO

Apparently there are some pedos claiming it shouldn't be illegal because like homosexuals they are born that way.


GTFO!
MW
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12914
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 8:55 pm
Has liked: 2581 times
Been liked: 1822 times

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby woodublieve12 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:08 pm

Trader wrote:
woodublieve12 wrote:For the people who oppose It, i am still waiting for one of them to give me a valid reason how two gay people marrying affects them?


Agreed, and equally I haven't seen a good reason why it should be changed to allow them to get married.

For mine, there is the 10% that really wants it ('the gay community'), the 10% who don't want it ('the church'), and then an 80% sitting in the middle who ultimately don't really care.

That 80% then fall into either:
a yes vote - under the premise of: it doesn't hurt me, so why not, or
a no vote - under the premise of: why fix what isn't broken.

Its a really emotive topic, but unfortunately it seems its hard to have a genuine discussion on the matter without being labeled as either a fag or a bigot.

If 'the gay community' came out with a clear an concise set of tangible benefits of allowing SSM, I recon they'd go a fair way to getting the yes vote over the line.


So the gay community are relying on 90% of the population to make a decision on who they can marry, which I will say again doesn't effect 90% of the population...

Makes zero sense that this is a debate. It's a human right. And if in same way two males or females getting married offends you HTFU
"Fellas, it’s OK to be in pain. It’s OK to hurt. It’s OK to be sad. It’s no longer OK to suffer in silence."
User avatar
woodublieve12
Coach
 
 
Posts: 17205
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 5:48 pm
Has liked: 3016 times
Been liked: 2384 times

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby woodublieve12 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:09 pm

.
Attachments
IMG_0554.JPG
IMG_0554.JPG (36.77 KiB) Viewed 1017 times
"Fellas, it’s OK to be in pain. It’s OK to hurt. It’s OK to be sad. It’s no longer OK to suffer in silence."
User avatar
woodublieve12
Coach
 
 
Posts: 17205
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 5:48 pm
Has liked: 3016 times
Been liked: 2384 times

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby Ronnie » Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:12 pm

bennymacca wrote:
cracka wrote:While I'm for gay marriage, I'm not opposed to having a referendum on the issue. I am opposed to it being a stand alone one though. Just have it when we have the next election, could even have a couple of other topics like voluntary euthanasia.
While this is an important issue for some people, I think there are other issues that need to be dealt with first like power prices, petrol prices etc


the libs wouldnt want it to be an election issue as they know they are on the losing side of the debate. They want it to be a non-binding postal vote as they think less younger people will vote for it

Ronnie wrote:
Depends whether the discrimination is justified or not. We discriminate against polygamists too, child brides etc etc. Has to be a fairly exclusive club.
Having said that it will get passed and life will go on.


did you just equate homosexuality to paedophilia?


Yes, to the extent both currently fall outside the realms of common law marriage.
Ronnie
Reserves
 
Posts: 795
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 7:57 am
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 84 times

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby bennymacca » Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:22 pm

Ronnie wrote:
bennymacca wrote:
cracka wrote:While I'm for gay marriage, I'm not opposed to having a referendum on the issue. I am opposed to it being a stand alone one though. Just have it when we have the next election, could even have a couple of other topics like voluntary euthanasia.
While this is an important issue for some people, I think there are other issues that need to be dealt with first like power prices, petrol prices etc


the libs wouldnt want it to be an election issue as they know they are on the losing side of the debate. They want it to be a non-binding postal vote as they think less younger people will vote for it

Ronnie wrote:
Depends whether the discrimination is justified or not. We discriminate against polygamists too, child brides etc etc. Has to be a fairly exclusive club.
Having said that it will get passed and life will go on.


did you just equate homosexuality to paedophilia?


Yes, to the extent both currently fall outside the realms of common law marriage.


yes but homosexuality isnt illegal. so its a ridiculous comparison to make
User avatar
bennymacca
Coach
 
 
Posts: 15028
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 12:22 pm
Has liked: 2253 times
Been liked: 1803 times
Grassroots Team: Freeling

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby Ronnie » Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:34 pm

bennymacca wrote:
Ronnie wrote:
bennymacca wrote:
cracka wrote:While I'm for gay marriage, I'm not opposed to having a referendum on the issue. I am opposed to it being a stand alone one though. Just have it when we have the next election, could even have a couple of other topics like voluntary euthanasia.
While this is an important issue for some people, I think there are other issues that need to be dealt with first like power prices, petrol prices etc


the libs wouldnt want it to be an election issue as they know they are on the losing side of the debate. They want it to be a non-binding postal vote as they think less younger people will vote for it

Ronnie wrote:
Depends whether the discrimination is justified or not. We discriminate against polygamists too, child brides etc etc. Has to be a fairly exclusive club.
Having said that it will get passed and life will go on.


did you just equate homosexuality to paedophilia?


Yes, to the extent both currently fall outside the realms of common law marriage.


yes but homosexuality isnt illegal. so its a ridiculous comparison to make


I wasn't referring to their legality or otherwise. The marriage act was not automatically changed when homosexual acts were legalized in the various jurisdictions some years ago.
Ronnie
Reserves
 
Posts: 795
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 7:57 am
Has liked: 8 times
Been liked: 84 times

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby tipper » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:13 pm

Ronnie wrote:I wasn't referring to their legality or otherwise. The marriage act was not automatically changed when homosexual acts were legalized in the various jurisdictions some years ago.


no, it was changed when a homophobic johnny howard realised that the wording didnt actually exclude gay marriage back when he was in power.

and that didnt require a plebiscite......
tipper
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:45 am
Has liked: 359 times
Been liked: 531 times
Grassroots Team: Peake

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby Jimmy_041 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:24 pm

woodublieve12 wrote:.


See! That just shows you how you can manipulate a survey
Just ask the right questions
Here is the real situation
SSM became legal on 19th August 2013 and BANG
http://www.news.com.au/new-zealand-migration-to-australia-soars-40-per-cent/news-story/4d1521c33c37899d443f1aae483b4b41
User avatar
Jimmy_041
Coach
 
 
Posts: 13981
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:30 pm
Has liked: 718 times
Been liked: 1071 times
Grassroots Team: Prince Alfred OC

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby tipper » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:35 pm

Jimmy_041 wrote:
woodublieve12 wrote:.


See! That just shows you how you can manipulate a survey
Just ask the right questions
Here is the real situation
SSM became legal on 19th August 2013 and BANG
http://www.news.com.au/new-zealand-migration-to-australia-soars-40-per-cent/news-story/4d1521c33c37899d443f1aae483b4b41


so you are trying to suggest that ssm in new zealand was the cause of the global financial crisis?

well that settles it then, we obviously cant vote to allow it :rolleyes:
tipper
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:45 am
Has liked: 359 times
Been liked: 531 times
Grassroots Team: Peake

Re: Now it's going to be a postal vote that won't count.

Postby bulldogproud » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:40 pm

Jimmy_041 wrote:
Magellan wrote:
bennymacca wrote:Conservative left?

Genuinely unsure who you are referring to

Those who identify as Labor because of the traditional industrial/workplace meaning of the word and the associated notions of equity and fairness for workers, but who also have religious convictions and thus are socially conservative on issues like abortion, gay marriage, etc. For example, there's a strong tradition of support for the Labor party among Catholics, who were working class back before and at the time of federation.


Spot on

Soldiers of Jesus immediately come to mind


Most of us Catholics are actually in favour of same-sex marriage, to be honest. Marriage was a term in use well before the Church created the 'SACRAMENT of marriage'. All that needs to happen is for the Church to be allowed to not have to perform same-sex weddings as SACRAMENTS. Then there really is no problem from the Church's point of view. For those who wish to be married through the sacrament of marriage, have the Church perform the wedding. For those who don't want it as a sacrament, have a civil wedding. Although I am a strong ALP voter, I would certainly support Smith's LNP Bill which provided these safeguards for religious communities.
Cheers
Last edited by bulldogproud on Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A Bulldog in winter; a WTDCC Eagle and OICC Wolf in Summer!
bulldogproud
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 3113
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 10:02 am
Location: West Beach
Has liked: 489 times
Been liked: 401 times
Grassroots Team: Imperials

PreviousNext

Board index   General Talk  Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |

cron