Gay Marriage Parliamentary vote vs Plebiscite

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by Clawhammer, Aug 26, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Clawhammer

    Clawhammer Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    9,311
    Likes Received:
    75
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Gone Fishin'
    Liberal Party minister Scott Morrison says only a plebescite should decide such an important matter.

    Ergo; He's admitting he doesn't have the numbers in Parliament to stop the bill but a majoritory of Aussies would be against the same sex marriage bill. Or in other words, most of the time the parliament does not represent the will of the people..

    VS

    Greens Party leader Adam Brant says a plebescite would cause an angry & divisive debate in the community and says the matter should be dealt with by a parliamentary concious vote.

    Ergo; He's admitting that a plebescites would reveal there isn't enough support in the community for his bill, but he knows ministers are too Canberra centric to actually represent the views of their own electorate. Or in other words, most of the time the parliament does not represent the will of the people.
     
  2. fishtaco

    fishtaco Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2014
    Messages:
    2,348
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Perth WA
    Funny I was talking about this all day yesterday!

    Lots of people I know agree that gays should do as they please and not be discriminated against but most of them said why do gays specifically need recognised marriage? you dont need recognised marriage in most western laws these days to be partners "as married" like in the past.

    Well more than a few have hinted they would possibly vote against it purely because they see it as totally unnecessary in a modern western world and just possibly a minority forcing political correctness on the majority as a win for that minority.

    I know a few gay couples who have been in a relationship partnership for many years and they are as good as married anyway just as so many heterosexual de faco relationships are these days.

    Anyway if it went to a peoples vote with our "compulsory voting system " it could very well end up in favour of"against" or split like the Brexit,then where would it put Australia in the racist bigotry world eyes?
     
  3. Ag bullet

    Ag bullet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2013
    Messages:
    876
    Likes Received:
    434
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    SE QLD
    that's the thing that irritates me about this issue is that it sets a precedent that could go anywhere. if a minority group such as gays can lobby and change the marriage act then it would be discrimination to not allow other changes to the act that would allow you to marry your dog, or have 3 wives or husbands or marry your siblings.

    sounds silly but so did gay marriage only a generation or two ago.
     
  4. Au-mageddon

    Au-mageddon Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2012
    Messages:
    1,806
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I just think that its an awful lot of money to spend.
     
  5. danman49

    danman49 Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2012
    Messages:
    3,987
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Adelaide
    Why don't they run the question on gay marriage in tandem with the proposed constitutional change to recognize Aboriginal Australians as the owners of Australia? Then we could have another question about whether BP should be allowed to endanger whales by drilling in the Great Australian Bight and BINGO you have a plebiscite on LAND RIGHTS FOR GAY WHALES! Not only would it kill three birds with one very expensive stone BUT people might actually be a bit more interested in the whole thing.

    Of course Adelaide had "LAND RIGHTS FOR GAY WHALES" emblazoned on a city wall back in the 80's so such a plebiscite would pass down here without a problem.....

    In my view spending some 160 million deciding this question is exceedingly wasteful and a lot of people would feel the same and probably vote against it to express their anger at the waste. Same will probably happen with the constitutional change for Aboriginal recognition.
     
  6. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,795
    Likes Received:
    2,110
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    Just an another area that the State should no influence in.
     
  7. Old Codger

    Old Codger Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 13, 2011
    Messages:
    4,936
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    The gays and supporters do not want a plebiscite, as they know it may well fail.

    JMO

    OC
     
  8. JulieW

    JulieW Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Messages:
    12,936
    Likes Received:
    2,057
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Australia
    More to do with this I think:

    from Hannah Gadsby the comedian and art historian (great doco btw)

     
  9. SteveS

    SteveS New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2016
    Messages:
    940
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Basically, from this point on, anybody mentioning or discussing the plebiscite or the issue of gay marriage will be accused of homophobia - unless of course they support it. They are trying, not only to have the plebiscite cancelled, but also shut down debate. The usual Lefty bullying.
     
  10. tas stacker

    tas stacker Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    278
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Hobart
    who cares who gets married or why?
    why the government or church feels it has a right to interfere in the private lives of people is beyond me
    what dose same sex marriage meen to the people at large? well nothing really if people want to get married that is there affair and nothing to do with anyone elese
    all this bs about how gay marriage will lead to animal human partnership is so stupid it makes me sick
    it just basic human rights, like not unlike detainees on islands were we don't have to see them living in tents like pows in ww2
     
  11. SteveS

    SteveS New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2016
    Messages:
    940
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Well obviously you do.
     
  12. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,795
    Likes Received:
    2,110
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    Because the church and the State exhibit the same characteristics as each other and view individuals in exactly the same way as each other.

    They both desire control over us, for that brings power and wealth. And they both claim that individuals require control, the church argues we are born with sin, even a tiny just born baby brings sin into the world so we must beg the forgiveness of God, the State believes individuals would be in a constant state of conflict with each other without the order that it brings to people's lives, we must live our lives according to the laws that the State enacts or we will be punished.

    The church believes their god created all, the State believes it created all. Same motives, same ridiculous claims, they just wear different masks. We are just children in their eyes, little children who are either incapable of making decisions for ourselves, or when we do make decisions they are the wrong ones.
     
  13. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,795
    Likes Received:
    2,110
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    You haven't answered his question, just deflected it.
     
  14. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,595
    Likes Received:
    229
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sydney
    Well, yes.

    It's not something that should be debated. It's about the right of two consenting adults to enter into a legal relationship that is "to the exclusion of all others".

    It is, by definition, nobody else's business.

    We didn't need a plebiscite for John Howard to change the marriage act so gay people couldn't get married so we don't need a plebiscite to change it back either. We pay 226 parliamentarians more that $200k apiece every year to take care of this kind of stuff as part of their bog standard, regular job of serving the people of Australia, including the gay ones.
     
  15. SteveS

    SteveS New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2016
    Messages:
    940
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brisbane
    I disagree.
     
  16. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,595
    Likes Received:
    229
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sydney
    Well, what else should we be debating then?

    That women should be disallowed from owning property? That black people shouldn't be allowed to drive cars? That gay people mustn't earn more than a certain sum of money each year? That Muslim women shouldn't be allowed to wear a scarf to cover their head but wearing a hat should be mandatory for atheist men?

    Maybe we should be debating whether Jews should be permitted to marry Christians?

    It's really simple: either all consenting adults have the same right to marry whomever they wish or they don't.

    And if not, why shouldn't we also then go about arbitrarily nullifying heterosexual people's marriages? If the law doesn't serve some people, why should it serve anyone else? We could nullify marriages at random and make a great reality TV show out of it where people have to go before a panel of judges and convince them that their relationship is worthy of legal recognition to get it reinstated. If their pitch isn't good enough, the host burns their wedding photos and melts their rings. So You Think Your Marriage Is Genuine?

    Maybe we could then have a plebiscite on whether the show should be cancelled or not.

    Or would that just be ridiculously offensive on just about every possible level?
     
  17. tas stacker

    tas stacker Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    278
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Hobart
    oh i agree that the "power groups" want the population unaware, stupid, and easy to control
    the idea that somehow the offical stasis of a same sex legally bound cupple could spell the end of western civilization is rhetorical nonsense
    again it's not the place of others to impose the will of outdated punitive values no matter how well intended on to the private lives of others
    what I see is a smaller group of people being oppressed by a larger self righteous group claiming to act for the greater good
     
  18. SteveS

    SteveS New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2016
    Messages:
    940
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brisbane
    You shouldn't mix alcohol with medications.
     
  19. The Expanding Man

    The Expanding Man Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2016
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    8
    We have the benefit of research and studies from countries that have had same sex marriages for a while now. I chuckled at this post, because only 4% of same sex marriages value monogamy. 80% of lesbian marriages end in divorce.

    Just because you lobby to call something marriage doesn't actually make it marriage.
     
  20. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,795
    Likes Received:
    2,110
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    Does that surprise you? One woman in a marriage is bad enough.

    :cool:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page