We take the latest South Park joint for a jaunt on the toilet... will it flush?
South Park: The Fractured But Whole Review!
We chat with the game director and creative head of Machine Games about the upcoming title where killing Nazis is all the rage.
A Happy Ending Filled with Nazis – Wolfenstein II Interview!
From the creators of Payday comes a new action title where you get to steal back treasure from Nazis.
Win a Copy of RAID World War II on PS4
Gay Marriage MEGATHREAD
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3191 posts

Thought this deserved its own thread since it's topical, seeing lots of no voters on the ole facebook

Anyway as the resident social scientist, here is the Aussie social science:

There is no evidence that would justify legal discrimination against same-sex partners and their families, but there is ample evidence that such discrimination contributes significantly to the risk of mental ill-health among gay, lesbian, bisexual and sex and/or gender diverse people, especially young people. Laws that discriminate against same-sex parented families don't stop people having children, they just make people's lives more difficult and contribute to a social climate of intolerance and inequity. If one believes that having married parents is good for children, then that is an argument in favour of marriage equality, not against it.
http://www.psychology.org.au/Content.aspx?ID=6797

The review will also assist psychologists in contributing, where appropriate, to public debates in relation to legal and public policy reform of the type that has occurred extensively over the last five years in Australia (for example, about which family relationships should be recognised in law, and who should be able to access fertility services or adopt children), and which can be expected to continue into the future. Given the importance of psychologists promoting accurate understandings of scientific research, a primary focus of this review is the role that psychological research can play in such debates, and the contribution of psychologists to promoting well-being for children, parents, families and the general community.


(TL;DR There is no evidence that same-sex parenting harms children)
http://www.psychology.org.au/publications/statements/lgbt_families/
07:49pm 17/09/17 Permalink
system
Internet
--
07:49pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3192 posts

Costs seem to be rising

Almost 100 ABS staff pulled off projects to work on same-sex marriage postal survey

The bureau confirmed about 90 staff have been removed from projects such as preparations for the 2021 census for work on running the $122 million survey for two months until its completion in November. There are fears the mass of workers taken off existing projects could lead to delays among the bureau's basic services, as well as its $257 million transformation. A survey of 150 CPSU members found the vast majority said the postal survey on same-sex marriage would negatively impact other work programs at the ABS. Ms Donnelly said the large transformation project could be set back many months.
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/almost-100-abs-staff-pulled-off-projects-to-work-on-samesex-marriage-postal-survey-20170915-gyi0np.html
07:54pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Vash
5535 posts
The narrative is always amusing from conservatives. MUH FREE SPEECH!@#*(&
Apparently free speech is being threatened by all these yes campaigners. The dumb doesn't let up.
08:14pm 17/09/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
26035 posts
If you vote no on this I think that's a pretty good sign that you need to hurry up and die.

I'm pretty confident it will be a resounding win for the yes vote.
08:17pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9496 posts
I got asked a really dumb question today.

https://i.imgur.com/NWTjIDQl.jpg

last edited by Raven at 21:08:00 17/Sep/17
09:06pm 17/09/17 Permalink
hardware
Brisbane, Queensland
11675 posts
I've seen so much misinformation from both sides about this, and it astounds me.

I don't think that people realise that homosexual couples have all the same rights under the law as any other de facto couple

So claiming that it's "human rights" is incorrect. The human rights aspect has already been resolved.

I don't understand why the gays want to get in on marriage so much. I don't know why they don't want their own thing? With so much of society already shunning marriage because of the stigma of it being some antiquated, restrictive relic, why is it now back in demand?

I'd be fine with it if they just wanted to call it something different. Garriage or something. Civil unions is just too dry and cheap a term, but some other more celebratory terminology.

I love being married, and I wish for marriage to mean more-or-less the same thing as it has for hundreds of years. I don't want someone to ask me if i'm married then there still be some ambiguity about whether it's to a woman or not.

I wholly support equal rights, for all the technical and legal matters within a relationship. I wholly support same gender couples having weddings. But please, please just call it something else.
09:06pm 17/09/17 Permalink
trillion
Ballarat, Victoria
4319 posts
if it's above love winning then how is it about marriage

most marriages i've seen aren't about love demanding attention and rights, they're about the care and trust in the assets they've accumulated together

marriage isn't about love, stupid f*****g gay's conflating s***

09:08pm 17/09/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
26036 posts
I don't understand why the gays want to get in on marriage so much.
I have a sneaking suspicion it's because they'd like to express their love to their partners in the same way that everyone else is able to.

You're a piece of s*** btw.
09:10pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3193 posts
^Calm down fpot he's 'under threat' enough as it is.

I don't think that people realise that homosexual couples have all the same rights under the law as any other


The Australian Human Rights Commission disagrees.

Same-sex couples and families are denied basic financial and work-related entitlements which opposite-sex couples and their families take for granted.
https://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/same-sex-same-entitlements-executive-summary
09:14pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2143 posts
You say this:

I don't understand why the gays want to get in on marriage so much.


Then say this
I love being married,


This is why everyone should vote yes.
09:16pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9497 posts
I don't understand why the gays want to get in on marriage so much.


Could it maybe be because they get no rights whatsoever in terms of estate and power of attorney compared to those available to straight people? Or that tax laws are set up in such a way that they're disadvantaged to other couples? You can pretty much gaurantee that IF they were allowed to have some kind of other civil union recognised as something other than by the word 'marriage', the catholic scum in power would ensure they don't get all the same rights, they'd butcher it to be so watered down so as to be virtually meaningless and useless for all legal purposes.
09:17pm 17/09/17 Permalink
hardware
Brisbane, Queensland
11676 posts
You're a piece of s*** btw.
And this is the problem. All the people with the notion of "if you don't vote a wholehearted yes, then you're a bigot who deserves to die" kind of hate that from what I can see, makes the 'no' voters dig their heels in more, as this simply isn't always the case.

Like all of my voting, I am rather on the fence. Perhaps if you responded with a strong case for yes you may be able to sway me? Calling someone a piece of s*** is more likely to turn people away from your cause than toward it.
09:18pm 17/09/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
26037 posts
I don't really care because to be honest you strike me as completely full of s*** and I feel you're just going to do what you feel is right which judging by your bulls*** will be to vote no. Also what other people have said, all your points were either completely dumb or just plain wrong.

It seems rather simple to me this one. Unless you are wholeheartedly voting yes for same sex couples being able to marry, then you're a piece of s***. Instead of having a widdle cry about it, why don't you and try and convince me that I'm wrong instead?
09:22pm 17/09/17 Permalink
hardware
Brisbane, Queensland
11677 posts
Could it maybe be because they get no rights whatsoever in terms of estate
This is not how the link I posted from legalaid qld govt reads.
09:22pm 17/09/17 Permalink
hardware
Brisbane, Queensland
11678 posts
why don't you and try and convince me that I'm wrong instead?
Because I suspect that if you're already to the point of calling people pieces of s*** for having anything other than a 100% yes, then I truly suspect no perspective from me is going to be able to change that.
09:24pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2144 posts
I love being married


Please comment on this and why you think it should be denied to 5% of the population?
09:38pm 17/09/17 Permalink
cnnnnnn
Other International
17 posts
you can't rewrite the Bible for populist status fad's like this is

sure love is love, watch the Australian Story show about a gay couple raising foster kid's and caring for them

they didn't need to feel married in the eye's of society to do that, it's from insecure status seeking gay's that this whole plebiscite s*** has gone on for this long
09:45pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3194 posts
I don't want someone to ask me if i'm married then there still be some ambiguity about whether it's to a woman or not.


Heaven forbid someone confuse you with a homo, sounds like some sort of nightmare
09:51pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Vash
5536 posts
heh hardware, 'perhaps if you responded with a strong case'
You dont want to vote yes. The strong case for voting yes is literally everywhere. You just don't want a minority of the population to have the same rights you do.
09:53pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9498 posts
And this is the problem. All the people with the notion of "if you don't vote a wholehearted yes, then you're a bigot who deserves to die" kind of hate that from what I can see, makes the 'no' voters dig their heels in more, as this simply isn't always the case.


No, the issue is that you have chosen to take an issue that affects you in no way whatsoever, and affects only others, and are choosing to take a stance that denies others the same opportunities you take for granted.

In most cases I hate the extreme polarization, but on this particular issue people against it are a special kind of scum.
09:56pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Tanaka Khan
Brisbane, Queensland
5795 posts
Story link

According to the No side countries that have allowed same sex marriage have had increased rapes in public female bathrooms...seriously?


While I fully support the Yes vote I think this is an absolute waste of $122 million.
10:04pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9499 posts
According to the No side countries that have allowed same sex marriage have had increased rapes in public female bathrooms...seriously?


What do you expect from a group of people who completely ignore scientific reason? Do you honestly expect they're going to be in any way rational whatsoever when it comes to cause and effect? These people are so completely ass-backwards and are nothing but a detriment to the entire world, yet are given such free reign to cause such hurt and social issues day after day while any benefit they may have once claimed to be able to give back to society diminishes with each passing day.

It's time for society to realize the church is a cancer on society which needs to be cut out before it kills the host.
10:12pm 17/09/17 Permalink
cnnnnnn
Other International
18 posts
what will be the gay alcohol and drug fundraiser trendiness if the Sydney Gay and Les Mardi Gras becomes about boring couples married with children struggling to pay bills and living expenses because they have made this commitment of marraige to each other

10:15pm 17/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39184 posts
One of the few libertarian leanings that I picked up while living in the mid-western US was a tendency to re-frame all questions like this in terms of more generally how and when the government should be able to limit the rights of citizens.

Viewed using that lens it is a total no brainer but it starts you on the slippery slope to civil libertarianism and letting responsible adults do what they want if it puts no one else's life, liberty or safety at risk!@#$ Religion is slavery of the mind so it's no wonder they are opposing it.
While I fully support the Yes vote I think this is an absolute waste of $122 million.
I agree completely.

I think that if the Yes vote overwhelming wins we should be checking each electorate to see how their respective members voted & campaigned on the issue & if it's massively out of wack we should make sure that information comes up repeatedly at the next election as a direct example of their being totally out of touch with their electorate and wasting taxpayer money as a result.
10:22pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Scooter
Brisbane, Queensland
6605 posts
I wholly support equal rights, for all the technical and legal matters within a relationship. I wholly support same gender couples having weddings. But please, please just call it something else.


So... Separate but equal?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separate_but_equal
10:24pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3195 posts
we should be checking each electorate to see how their respective members voted & campaigned on the issue & if it's massively out of wack we should make sure that information comes up repeatedly at the next election as a direct example of their being totally out of touch
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-13/same-sex-marriage-support-map-vote-compass/8788978

heheheh. quuuuuuueeenslandah!!1!
10:29pm 17/09/17 Permalink
taggs
6511 posts
Government shouldn't define or regulate marriage it should be a private contractual arrangement between consenting adults.

Having said that given the retardedly imperfect world we live in will be voting yes to allow homosexuals the same opportunity to ruin their lives that us heteros have.
10:42pm 17/09/17 Permalink
trillion
Ballarat, Victoria
4320 posts
Religion is slavery of the mind


you may be confusing slavery with subservience

actually yes you are
11:20pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4615 posts
those on the progressive side seem to have no problem targeting people's livelihoods and generally squandering the moral high ground, and this issue is no exception, for instance author Benjamin Law's tasteful joke about "hate-f*****g anti-gay MPs"

marriage equality is perfectly defensible on its own merits

and given it's part of Labor's platform, it's inevitable anyway
11:24pm 17/09/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18446 posts
Why are you people calling it a vote?

It's not a vote.

It is a very, very expensive opinion poll that has no legally binding outcomes.

It such a blatant waste of money by a government that was all about stopping the waste and not spending s***, what a bunch of hypocrites.
12:14am 18/09/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12890 posts
That Safe Schools is going to draw a lot of NO votes.
It doesnt help when Safe Schools proponents are leading marches for SSM.

Then you get Socialist Alliance/Antifa spitting at Christians, tearing down their signs, yelling at them, generally preventing them from demonstrating the alternative view.

After an hour 40 to 60 activists arrived with a megaphone, led by “Queer officers” of the Students’ Representative Council, which has an annual budget of $1.7 million. For the next five hours they screamed abuse at the Catholic students, calling them: “homophobes” “bigots” “neo-Nazis” “gay-bashers” and chanting: “Bigot scum have got to go” and “We will fight, we will win, put the bigots in the bin”.

They up-ended the table of kebabs and threw bowls of hummus on the ground. They stole pamphlets and placards, threw condoms and glitter at the students, chalked “F..k off bigots” on the path, swore and yelled anti-Christian abuse: “Go f..k yourself. Go wank yourself off at home with your f..ing Jesus picture”. “You don’t belong on campus. You are bigots and haters:” “Didn’t you know Jesus was bisexual?” “Suck my d..k, bro”.


http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/yes-campaigners-show-their-true-colours/news-story/6ad4b71806c4c610329a1cb7dcaa43b2

Is that the kind of Society we are supposed to be voting YES for ?
02:34am 18/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39185 posts
those on the progressive side seem to have no problem targeting people's livelihoods and generally squandering the moral high ground, and this issue is no exception, for instance author Benjamin Law's tasteful joke about "hate-f*****g anti-gay MPs"
hmmm

there are f***wits on both sides, but when you single out one of the f***wits (... without a link? no idea who Benjamin Law is) without noting others it seems a bit unfair, even if you ignore the fact that one of the sides is literally a relic from the iron age
04:53am 18/09/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23769 posts
I'm voting no in the hope of some major triggering.

The pious lecturing is nauseating.
06:03am 18/09/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40802 posts
bad post hardware :(

naive me thought that yes vote would win in a landslide, because really, how could any intelligent modern person be so petty as to be concerned about what other loving adults want to do.

but then i read all the comments on man cave on facey.

now i want yes vote to getup, just so that all the horrible people there get upset. it makes me sad to think there are actually lots of people who are really like that still around in our world.

also, what a waste of money.
06:46am 18/09/17 Permalink
simul
Brisbane, Queensland
1669 posts
Is that the kind of Society we are supposed to be voting YES for ?


That is the kind of Society we currently live in, it has nothing to do with gay marriage.

The only thing that will change with gay marriage is that a minority in the country will now have the rights that others do and will have a more pleasant life because of it. As soon as it happens (and it is obviously going to happen, its only a matter of when) everything will go back to normal.

How the hell are we the last western democratic country to make this happen? Has Australia become that bumf*** backwards? Why the hell is the conservative position the same as all those "evil undemocratic countries" that they claim to hate? Or is it purely a hate of minorities, regardless of the actual issue?
As of 1 September 2017, same-sex marriage is legally recognized (nationwide or in some parts) in the following countries: Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico,[nb 1] the Netherlands,[nb 2] New Zealand,[nb 3] Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom,[nb 4] the United States[nb 5] and Uruguay. The law in Germany is not yet in force. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage
06:51am 18/09/17 Permalink
reload!
Brisbane, Queensland
7732 posts

calling them "the gays"
07:08am 18/09/17 Permalink
DecayingCorpse
Brisbane, Queensland
2287 posts
I'd like to hear some arguments from the no side that isn't based solely upon god/jesus/bible/save the children/downfall of society/destruction of nuclear family/gay onslaught/margaret court demented prophecies.

Because other than that rubbish, there's no legitimate reason for a no vote. Let's not forget the religious institutions have fought every social progression since the enlightenment.
07:36am 18/09/17 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
21363 posts
but then i read all the comments on man cave on facey.


what did you expect from the bogan a****** of the internet?

everything i see on tv from the No side is nothing related to gay people getting married, it is all these perceived things that will happen after. or better yet they are saying that these things are happen now like 'my kid had to do XYZ in school' so if they are already happening what will change if same sex marriage is allowed?

everything i have seen from the No side is excuses thinly veiling their homophobia ie. hardware in this thread

I don't want someone to ask me if i'm married then there still be some ambiguity about whether it's to a woman or not.


this is some f*****g gold right there, utterly rubbish excuse

and fpot's response while i agree, is what is wrong with the yes side.
08:11am 18/09/17 Permalink
ravn0s
Brisbane, Queensland
19139 posts
Leading "no" campaigners, including Turnbull government MPs, say they fear it will become illegal to oppose same-sex marriage in word or even thought, if gay marriage is legalised.


wtf! these people are insane.

08:23am 18/09/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40803 posts
Cory Bernardi, hahahahaha, what a joke of a human.
08:56am 18/09/17 Permalink
Zapo
Brisbane, Queensland
3396 posts
On this issue, like many others there are some crazy extremists. I'm really appalled (but unsurprised) at the f***wits on the extremes of either side and I think the best thing we can do is to ignore them.

I think the campaign the 'no' people are running is likely to be quite successful because they're linking it to safe schools which is pretty divisive itself. There are likely to be quite a few people swayed by the campaign, even though it's not strictly related.

I guess now all I/we can do is wait! Here's for a positive 'yes' vote so we can move onto the next bit of social change - euthanasia!

09:05am 18/09/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12891 posts
Freedom of Speech with Consequences

11:40am 18/09/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2145 posts
Just death threats to high school kids from the vote no side

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJ2kf3_V4AEsteB.jpg
02:39pm 18/09/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3302 posts
What kind of fb message group is that Sir Redhat?

The hard left does themselves no favours with the way they approach this, you can't persuade people by belittling and condemning them, you just create more enemies. Congrats, you played yourself.

Also disappointed at the ridiculous extremity on both sides, and that they're wasting all this money / depressing public discourse on a useless postal opinion poll. It should already be legal.

I don't want someone to ask me if i'm married then there still be some ambiguity about whether it's to a woman or not.


Why does that concern you?
05:19pm 18/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3196 posts
Trigger warning: Homosexual themes


A tolerant society does not tolerate intolerance.
05:27pm 18/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39186 posts
I'm voting no in the hope of some major triggering.

The pious lecturing is nauseating.
it must be tough trying to choose between your desire for increased libertarianism and your desire to deliberately make people unhappy with your words and/or your actions!

but I think you'll do the right thing anyway because I don't think you're that much of a hypocrite :D
05:28pm 18/09/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
26038 posts
edit: actually who cares
06:12pm 18/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39187 posts
The hard left does themselves no favours with the way they approach this, you can't persuade people by belittling and condemning them, you just create more enemies. Congrats, you played yourself.
it is important to remember that - as with extremists on the "other side", that:

a) the numbers of them both are extremely small
b) their numbers seem massively exaggerated because they are the literal vocal minority
c) the Internet echoes and amplifies their comments massively, in part because of the clickbait-driven revenue model of modern media
d) the damage of this is exacerbated by various Internet trolls who take pleasure in the Internet s***fights caused by saying outrageous things. Some of them are genuinely unstable, some are just sad cases, some are just short-timers doing it for the laughs.
e) there are people that are paid to roam the Internet and intentionally cause dissent to destabilise populations and markets, either for arcane political goals or purely to make money. Remember that literally EVERY time you read something like that it could literally be a paid Russian agitator just trying to fire you up, or a Macedonian click-bait farmer trying to make a fraction of a cent by tricking you into clicking on their links. Trust no one! Also don't click on links.
06:13pm 18/09/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2756 posts
Thread delivers in spades. Just awesome.

Good to see fpot on the campaign trail for Trump2020.

Unless you are wholeheartedly voting yes for same sex couples being able to marry


Doesn't go far enough in my view. unless you vote yes with a mixture of your own blood and semen while maintaining a full erection you should be burnt at the stake.

Just a quick question. Is calling someone a piece of s*** because they're voting no on this because they've worried they might be confused for a homosexual considered extreme? Because I don't think it is.


Yes its extreme, and we know you don't.

Just death threats to high school kids from the vote no side


Just to remind ourselves of fpots opening gambit. You know while we're all worried about the tone of the debate n'all.

If you vote no on this I think that's a pretty good sign that you need to hurry up and die.


*amazing*. I think we know why the yes campaign was worried about a 'respectful' debate. Nobody had said anything at that point. he's gone from strength to strength I'm sure we can all agree.
06:35pm 18/09/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12892 posts
'scuse me while fpot punches the sky

http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/8954580-3x2-700x467.jpg
07:19pm 18/09/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2757 posts
edit: actually who cares


Glorious. I'm supposed to believe you are actually for the yes vote? Because you've behaved exactly as a paid no vote troll would. You should be ashamed of yourself.
07:24pm 18/09/17 Permalink
Jim
UK
13729 posts

I've seen so much misinformation from both sides about this, and it astounds me.

Yep, except the astound part - it seems par for the course on issues like these to see misinformation flying about. In fact I'd bet it's part of the conservative government's motive for pushing this postal poll thing - they know a vote in parliament would not have the same effect on public discourse as vigorous campaigns intended to sway public opinion.


I don't think that people realise that homosexual couples have all the same rights under the law as any other de facto couple

So claiming that it's "human rights" is incorrect. The human rights aspect has already been resolved.

It doesn't seem to be quite that cut and dry I think, have a read of this and some of it's supporting references: http://www.sbs.com.au/topics/sexuality/agenda/article/2017/09/14/do-same-sex-couples-really-have-same-rights-married-couples

I don't understand why the gays want to get in on marriage so much. I don't know why they don't want their own thing? With so much of society already shunning marriage because of the stigma of it being some antiquated, restrictive relic, why is it now back in demand?

For me personally, I don't really care why someone else wants to get married - unless of course they actually asked me for advice about it, then I might try and find out more about their motives and what they want. Otherwise I'm just assuming, which usually ends up with me realising i was just ignorant to the reasons.

The way I look at it is that ultimately, even if it's truly for something as seemingly whimsical as say, the desire to undergo the marriage process for purely for cosmetic reasons: what business do I have really, in objecting to that notion? Notwithstanding the fact that in many or most cases it's probably *not* for such trivial reasons that people want to get married. But even if it was...?


I'd be fine with it if they just wanted to call it something different. Garriage or something. Civil unions is just too dry and cheap a term, but some other more celebratory terminology.

I love being married, and I wish for marriage to mean more-or-less the same thing as it has for hundreds of years. I don't want someone to ask me if i'm married then there still be some ambiguity about whether it's to a woman or not.

Well noone can rightly tell you how you should feel about that. I guess I would just hope you reflect on that a bit and ask yourself how much that ambiguity really means to you, compared to the way many same-sex couples might feel about not being allowed to marry.
07:27pm 18/09/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
26039 posts
but I think you'll do the right thing anyway because I don't think you're that much of a hypocrite :D
heh
07:34pm 18/09/17 Permalink
hardware
Brisbane, Queensland
11679 posts
Thankyou Jim, I appreciate the time and consideration you've taken to craft your response.

Well noone can rightly tell you how you should feel about that. I guess I would just hope you reflect on that a bit and ask yourself how much that ambiguity really means to you, compared to the way many same-sex couples might feel about not being allowed to marry.
This carries some piercing clarity. This is something I will need to seriously consider; and I suspect will be the statement that ends up swaying me.
07:39pm 18/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39188 posts

It doesn't seem to be quite that cut and dry I think, have a read of this and some of it's supporting references: http://www.sbs.com.au/topics/sexuality/agenda/article/2017/09/14/do-same-sex-couples-really-have-same-rights-married-couples
The other thing that is interesting about this (to me anyway) is that if you go down the argument of the "they already have all the rights they need", you're making an implicit statement that you think marriage is only about whatever legal rights that the government is prepared to enforce. i.e., that it basically just a contract.

I would also add to the link Jim posted about "proving de facto status" - it's easy to handwave that away as "oh who cares it's just some paperwork".

I had to go through that process to move to the UK to get a visa and I think it was the most stressful, difficult thing I've ever done in my life. I kind of understand it from the perspective of a foreign government wanting to make sure I'm legit, but the idea of having to go through that same process to prove to my own government that I'm actually in a proper relationship is terrifying to me and I would not want anyone to have to go through it because they were denied the right of marriage (meanwhile any random couple with the pre-governmentally approved set of genitals can get the requisite bit of paper regardless of how bulls*** their relationship is and what their reasons are for getting married).
07:41pm 18/09/17 Permalink
Nmag
Sydney, New South Wales
840 posts
I'll vote yes.
08:47pm 18/09/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18448 posts

I don't want someone to ask me if i'm married then there still be some ambiguity about whether it's to a woman or not.


Insecure much?

10:18pm 18/09/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
26040 posts
Yo Pete I quickly flipped you off ignore because I was genuinely interested to see what side of the debate you were on in regards to SSM. Unsurprisingly it was just a pile of your usual blubbery bulls*** but I do have one question before I flip you back on. How come you will vigorously defend the right for actual nazis to loudly and publically voice their support for an ideology that is literally based on the genocide of people who seek to oppose and undermine it, yet a light-hearted but admittedly cynical joke made about how no voters should hurry up and die just gets you so damn angry? Kind of says to me that I may be dealing with a person who may be a little 'unbalanced' unless there's some subtle nuance about you I'm missing (lol)
10:43pm 18/09/17 Permalink
simul
Brisbane, Queensland
1670 posts
I would also add to the link Jim posted about "proving de facto status" - it's easy to handwave that away as "oh who cares it's just some paperwork".

I had to go through that process to move to the UK to get a visa and I think it was the most stressful, difficult thing I've ever done in my life. I kind of understand it from the perspective of a foreign government wanting to make sure I'm legit, but the idea of having to go through that same process to prove to my own government that I'm actually in a proper relationship is terrifying to me and I would not want anyone to have to go through it because they were denied the right of marriage (meanwhile any random couple with the pre-governmentally approved set of genitals can get the requisite bit of paper regardless of how bulls*** their relationship is and what their reasons are for getting married).


Yeah, I know same sex couples that have major issues with the USA for this. If your on something like an e3 visa or green card, you can bring your married partner with you, but not defacto. The USA (and AFAIK other countries) do not recognise defacto for visa purposes. So not being able to be married does have legitimate life impacting problems for them - its not just a badge.

This will be looked back upon in the same way people were opposed to inter-racial marriage.
12:14am 19/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39191 posts
Yeah, I know same sex couples that have major issues with the USA for this. If your on something like an e3 visa or green card, you can bring your married partner with you, but not defacto. The USA (and AFAIK other countries) do not recognise defacto for visa purposes. So not being able to be married does have legitimate life impacting problems for them - its not just a badge.
Yup. That was a factor for me leaving the USA. It was too hard to stay without getting married. I have several friends that got married not because they really gave a s*** about getting married, but because it made it possible for them to go to the USA together for work.

As painful as it was getting a UK visa, at least it was f*****g possible and they don't treat you like an a****** simply for not being married. (Actually to be fair the process of getting a visa if you're actually married in the UK is about as difficult as what I did.)
12:26am 19/09/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3305 posts
That's a good point, thanks trog. Those disruptive ideology bot / paid troll networks are super interesting. It'd be fascinating to see how many are sponsored by Russia, as this seems to be a key part of their new 'hybrid war' doctrine that they use to sow unrest in other countries. We really are well into the 'information wars' as it were.

Many countries don't have the defacto couple type legal rights that Aus does, I know South Africa and the UK don't.

Yeah I think that stance is kinda extreme fpot, or perhaps it's just a bit c***y, which ironically detracts from the moral superiority implicitly tied to the stance. I agree that gay people should be able to marry, saddens me that they still can't and that we have to debate it. Yet I find that kind of stance on the issue, and I've seen it all around the place, rather despicable tbh. You can't win people over to different ideologies with abuse.

Who can say? Seems to me hardware is open to changing his mind. Jim's reasonable discussion based approach seems to have had a positive effect, where as yours did the opposite. Obvs this is an over simplified and assumptive example on a internet gaming forum, but I think it's actually a fairly apt micro analogy for how these moral liberal v conservative debates are playing out in the wider public discourse.

imo, this is one of the reasons the left hasn't already won the culture war, when arguably we should have, and some time ago at that.
12:45am 19/09/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23770 posts
it must be tough trying to choose between your desire for increased libertarianism and your desire to deliberately make people unhappy with your words and/or your actions!

but I think you'll do the right thing anyway because I don't think you're that much of a hypocrite :D


I'm actually voting no because I believe marriage is a long standing traditional institution for reproducing and raising families. It is a tough trade off between the libertarian perspective and the conservative perspective but ultimately restricting marriage to a man and a woman does not limit gay people from anything.

I am very concerned by the expansion of the LGBTIQ mental illness industry. And I don't think it is the ideal environment for children to be raised in. I'm not going to try and convince anyone. Everyone's mind is made up.

Abuse me or whatever, I don't care. And I don't care about the vote either. It is such an inconsequential issue either way. Life will go on, but I am gonna cast my vote. Cast your vote and move on.
04:09am 19/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39192 posts
but ultimately restricting marriage to a man and a woman does not limit gay people from anything.
I mean it restricts them from at least one thing
Abuse me or whatever, I don't care
Au contraire, I give you props for not only recognising but admitting your cognitive dissonance. Progress!

I don't know how to convince you other than to point out I prefer libertarian infi over conservative infi. The former would recognise that the state should not have any place in interfering in a contract between adult citizens, right?! In pretty much every other case I can think of you have advocated hard for the state to stay out of the affairs of citizens, businesses, organisations, etc, but this gets a pass because of tradition?!

I'd understand the "traditional institution" aspect, except the divorce rate is something like half the marriage rate, so it's clear that traditional marriage has long fallen by the wayside.

We've argued about this before and I recall that you don't like my sci fi-inspired view that marriage should just be a contract like every other agreement between parties - outside of an organised religion that is, in practice, exactly what it is. Generally you seem to think that every other situation in the world, commercial or personal, should be resolvable by adults making decisions of their own free will without government intervention. Anyway, you've already recognised the disconnect here.
And I don't care about the vote either.
But just enough to vote no? If you truly don't care, don't vote.
05:44am 19/09/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23772 posts
It is not cognitive dissonance. It is two competing sets of values. I think the libertarian aspect of being able to marry is outweighed by the utilitarian value of the institution in that it facilitates cultural values that go to the renewal of the society. Gay people cannot reproduce for society (not by natural means).

Legal inequities can be just as effectively addressed by amending other legislation. Marriage as an institution is between a man and a woman.

But just enough to vote no? If you truly don't care, don't vote.


And neglect my obligation as a citizen? No way! People who don't vote are lazy. From the looks of it the vote will succeed and life will go on.
06:41am 19/09/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40804 posts
I am very concerned by the expansion of the LGBTIQ mental illness industry.


perhaps giving LGBTQI community the same rights as hetero's will improve their mental health?

last edited by Spook at 07:11:51 19/Sep/17
07:05am 19/09/17 Permalink
Twisted
Brisbane, Queensland
12260 posts
I wholly support equal rights, for all the technical and legal matters within a relationship. I wholly support same gender couples having weddings. But please, please just call it something else.
Is this actually I thing that people are legitimately worried about? I personally don't really give a s*** if gay people get married or not and I don't really give a s*** if straight people get married or not (the way f*****s get divorced these days its 1 big laughable joke). I'm voting yes to stir up my parents because they are frothing at the mouth about all of this like rabid animals and I love it!
I wholly support equal rights, for all the technical and legal matters within a relationship. I wholly support same gender couples having weddings. But please, please just call it something else.
Isn't this what white people said back in the day about them negros? It was OK, just as long as they went to their own schools, used their own buses, their own public toilets, kept off the grass at the park, and certainly kept their black ass monkey hands off their white daughters? I mean I wasn't alive at the time, but you sound like you might have been.
07:15am 19/09/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2758 posts
Yo Pete I quickly flipped you off ignore because I was genuinely interested to see what side of the debate you were on in regards to SSM. Unsurprisingly it was just a pile of your usual blubbery bulls*** but I do have one question before I flip you back on. How come you will vigorously defend the right for actual nazis to loudly and publically voice their support for an ideology that is literally based on the genocide of people who seek to oppose and undermine it, yet a light-hearted but admittedly cynical joke made about how no voters should hurry up and die just gets you so damn angry? Kind of says to me that I may be dealing with a person who may be a little 'unbalanced' unless there's some subtle nuance about you I'm missing (lol)


I was never off ignore you pathetic coward. You just can't step to.

I'm genuinely interested to see if you actually care about anything as opposed to spouting how much you care about things.

Here is the difference because apparently you're too dumb to figure it out on your own.

One topic is about the right of people to speak at all.

The other topic is about a vote which will give rights to people who don't currently have them.

If you *care* about the people without rights you should be attempting to persuade people to vote for it.

Instead you prioritized this "light hearted joke".

If you vote no on this I think that's a pretty good sign that you need to hurry up and die.


Let me translate what that actually says for you fpot.

"Fpot cares more about being seen to support his in-group's opinion then persuading people that don't already hold it, to the point he is willing to alienate people into voting against him."

It is a naked betrayal of the people who need the vote to go ahead. All you had to do was explain the case for yes in a civil tone. Instead unprompted you spouted that "zinger". Stating the case for yes was too higher bar for you, unsurprisingly. And before you waffle on about how you used to, this vote is happening now. The vote will have real consequences now. It's cowardly to boot.

why don't you head down to the local mosque and pull that s*** you lazy repugnant coward. Go nail "if you vote no you should die" to a mosque door.

You'll have a go at hardware though.

But here is the thing. I don't want you to change. I want to you stay exactly the way you are. an ineffectual hypocritical moron scolding people who don't hold the right opinions, busily undermining his own objectives who genuinely believes he holds the moral high ground over anyone. It is awesome.
07:53am 19/09/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3306 posts
If the value of marriage is its tradition as an institution, how far back and in what way are we traditionalising? Alliance making between feudal states? An effective means of population control? A viable economic unit? The religious sanctimony? Tradition seems an odd rationale to me. Especially given all the statistical negatives of marriage, and that the cultural values can exist outside of marriage / the traditional family unit.
08:32am 19/09/17 Permalink
notgreazy
Other International
809 posts
It is not cognitive dissonance. It is two competing sets of values.
https://i.imgur.com/HKEIxSS.png
Is this actually I thing that people are legitimately worried about? I personally don't really give a s*** if gay people get married or not and I don't really give a s*** if straight people get married or not (the way f*****s get divorced these days its 1 big laughable joke). I'm voting yes to stir up my parents because they are frothing at the mouth about all of this like rabid animals and I love it!
Hahaha that's awesome, same here :)
09:57am 19/09/17 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16786 posts
hardware: oh dear

I have to admit that I struggle with understanding the No campaign and its supporters. Every time someone tells me they are voting No I can't help it, I just lose respect for them as a person :( Its not a big deal, its kind of like when people mention they are into homeopathy or reiki or are anti-vax.

You're entitled to your opinion, sure, its just so f*****g cringey to be so ... ugh I don't even know what the word is. There's probably a nice long German word for it.
10:51am 19/09/17 Permalink
mission
Brisbane, Queensland
9307 posts
Come in the bum makes Jesus sad :(



Unless it's a chick - AMIRITE??
11:10am 19/09/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12893 posts
As someone alluded to earlier, there are two kinds of Marriages, Gay and Normal.
Until there is one definition for all a Gay Marriage will be considered as an almost Marriage.

The silence from Islam has been deafening.
Considering all the stupid s*** Keyser Trad and his gang comes out with there has been nothing on Gay Marriage.

Islamic Friendship Association of Australia head Keysar Trad has begun a tour of prayer halls in a bid to thwart same-sex marriage, comparing gay love to incestuous relationships­. “We might love our mum and dad intensively but you don’t denigrate that love with sexual behaviour,” he said.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/muslim-leaders-using-sermons-to-urge-no-vote-in-samesex-marriage-plebiscite/news-story/d81f085a26d952905a3cc8076cdfed30

There we go, I suspect we will see the Socialist Alliance and ANTIFA organizing a protest against this ?
11:24am 19/09/17 Permalink
deadlyf
Queensland
4055 posts


It'd be nice if we could say the biggest human rights issue Australia faced right now was as trivial as the right to marry. I mean we can't, but god damn it'd be nice if we could.

My opinion is that it's pretty laughable that the government is shirking it's democratic responsibility to ensure that the law doesn't discriminate unnecessarily against a minority, especially over such a pointless issue as legal marriage.

There should be a checklist that any democratic government has to go through when making a law,
a) Does this law discriminate against a minority group.
b) Is there a good strong reason for this discrimination.
c) If no, then don't make the f*****g law.

For all the people using the "tradition" argument, just because something is old really doesn't mean it is morally right. We have ditched a hell of a lot of traditions that today we recognize as morally reprehensible like slavery, racial segregation and lets not forget that old topical chestnut of women being considered the property of the husband.
11:47am 19/09/17 Permalink
Jim
UK
13730 posts
No worries Hardware, thanks for your consideration

trog: aargh I had sort of forgotten about having to do all that - man what a pain that was. We'd been married for about 24 years when trying to get my wife's UK visa, yet still had to put all that stuff together. We ended up collating all of our personal email over several years into pdf or something, along with all the photos we could find showing us together in various locations etc, covering 1-2 decades, and some sort of declaration of our love for each other and a spiel about why we wanted to be married. Financial records for shopping and other living expenses split between our bank accounts, bills in both names which I had to write something about because we tend to just have things in the name of the person who happens to sign up for the thing. Couldn't believe it. And we still of course had to provide our actual marriage documentation, which I had naively thought would be all we'd need, period.
11:49am 19/09/17 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
21365 posts
As someone alluded to earlier, there are two kinds of Marriages, Gay and Normal.
Until there is one definition for all a Gay Marriage will be considered as an almost Marriage.


only according the no campaign facey.
12:42pm 19/09/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9500 posts
My opinion is that it's pretty laughable that the government is shirking it's democratic responsibility to ensure that the law doesn't discriminate unnecessarily against a minority, especially over such a pointless issue as legal marriage.


When you put it that way, it's a pretty f*****g simple litmus test:
1. Does the current, existing law discriminate against any minority group?
2. Would modifying the law to remove that discrimination mean other groups are discriminated against?

The catholics in group 2 will cry "yes, it means we won't be able to discriminate against them" - that's not the same thing. Allowing you to discriminate against others does not make you a discriminated group. It makes you a*******, but that's a whole other topic.
12:53pm 19/09/17 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10643 posts
I'm actually voting no because I believe marriage is a long standing traditional institution for reproducing and raising families.

So if married people fail to have children surely they have their married status revoked?
04:12pm 19/09/17 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16789 posts
All post-menopausal women are ineligible to marry in infiland.
04:45pm 19/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39193 posts
It is not cognitive dissonance. It is two competing sets of values.
Yeh, but cognitive dissonance is what is going on in your brain when you try to hold two CONFLICTING (not competing) sets of values.
I think the libertarian aspect of being able to marry is outweighed by the utilitarian value of the institution in that it facilitates cultural values that go to the renewal of the society. Gay people cannot reproduce for society (not by natural means).
Reproduction is a less interesting part of the discussion to me - many otherwise totally normal heterosexual couples can not reproduce by natural means either, but they are still people that can get married, so that argument is easy to blow out of the water. What I assume you mean to say is that children fare better in a 'traditional' household with a mother & father, but I suspect the jury is still out on that (and in any case, there are countless 'traditional families' that are huge trainwrecks when it comes to raising children).

I don't buy the "institution that facilitates cultural values" part; it's the same argument that our "nation is built on Christian values".
Marriage as an institution is between a man and a woman.
Fair enough. Bit boringly dogmatic but at least it draws a line in the sand between where tradition trumps liberty!
05:50pm 19/09/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
26042 posts
I am very concerned by the expansion of the LGBTIQ mental illness industry. And I don't think it is the ideal environment for children to be raised in. I'm not going to try and convince anyone. Everyone's mind is made up.
Is it okay to call this guy a piece of s***? Or should he be gently cajoled to reason?
06:31pm 19/09/17 Permalink
pARODY
Brisbane, Queensland
1208 posts
One part that's annoying me is the amount of people posting on social media their full page with the barcodes visible. Those can be used to hijack the your vote. Clone the page with someone else's barcode, print at a location that will get back to the ABS before the legit vote and it's recorded as your vote. :3
06:36pm 19/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39194 posts
One part that's annoying me is the amount of people posting on social media their full page with the barcodes visible. Those can be used to hijack the your vote. Clone the page with someone else's barcode, print at a location that will get back to the ABS before the legit vote and it's recorded as your vote. :3
^^ really!!! Very interesting. Someone should do an infoseccy blog post about that stat!
06:37pm 19/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3198 posts
I am very concerned by the expansion of the LGBTIQ mental illness industry. And I don't think it is the ideal environment for children to be raised in.


I really hope this is a troll.. and what about the LGBTI+ children infi? What environment raises them? Should they be beaten into being straight, like the good old days? You don't need no mental illness professionals telling you how to hit and yell at your kids or animals huh.

Or maybe you are just supportive their current suicide rate, which is orders of magnitude higher than their peers. But that's nothing to do with any disadvantage they have, right?
07:06pm 19/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3199 posts
There is no scientific evidence that same-sex parenting harms children
07:08pm 19/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3200 posts
07:20pm 19/09/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40806 posts
There is no scientific evidence that same-sex parenting harms children


really, hetro couples have set the bar pretty low a lot of the time
07:23pm 19/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39196 posts
really, hetro couples have set the bar pretty low a lot of the time
but, tradition
07:51pm 19/09/17 Permalink
notgreazy
Other International
810 posts

I heard this academic on the radio discussing her view points on why gays/lesbians should vote no. A few interesting points come up:

Listen here.

Here are more articles:
http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2017/08/16/4719165.htm
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/why-should-we-fight-for-marriage-when-its-been-so-bad-for-so-many-women-20170910-gyeej4.html

She bashes libertarians, a lot. But she does make good points. I do think there are legit reasons to be against the pleb but still be in support of same sex marriage. There are also reasons to be completely against marriage. It gets all very complicated when the concept of marriage that all people in Australia get exposed to, white dresses, perfect day, rings, flowers, changing names etc etc is one that is founded on archaic beliefs. There are beliefs that people hold about marriage, such as thinking you've "made it", that really negatively affect post marriage life yet they are enshrined and even highly respected and expected of people.

I can also understand why conservatives such as infi think marriage is between a man and a women, it's because the current concept of marriage in the majority of western countries is founded on Christian values. You can argue marriage predates all abrahamic religions, but the current concept is very Christian, as an example polygamy is outlawed, yet this is a union between man and women! The idea of marriage extends all the way down to what a "family" is, a bunch of men or women isn't considered a family even if they operate like one.

It's more complicated than "love is love".


09:40pm 19/09/17 Permalink
dais
Brisbane, Queensland
12216 posts
I don't really have anything to say that hasn't already been said. If you don't like gay marriage then don't get gay married. However it may come about in Australia, if you feel the need to campaign against gay marriage as a thing, you are homophobic. It is hilarious how cliched and stupid the arguments against it are.
10:45pm 19/09/17 Permalink
Hogfather
Cairns, Queensland
16790 posts
but, tradition

I feel like this argument may count as an appeal to tradition maybe?
11:26pm 19/09/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12896 posts
Sacked for saying she was going to vote NO


12:53am 20/09/17 Permalink
Zapo
Brisbane, Queensland
3397 posts
You're posting Andrew Bolt...you lose.
07:39am 20/09/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9501 posts
I have no problem with this. This woman was basically saying "I am going to do my part to deny people rights, because my religion says it should be that way". In other words, she is mentally sick and that illness is now being used to do harm to the lifestyle of others even though it will affect her personally in no way whatsoever. This is nothing more than spiteful and vitriolic. Would it also be acceptable if she had said "I am going to do my part to kill X, because my religion says it must be done"? No, it would not. This is no better. And no company should be required to employ a person who not only expresses that opinion, but does so while being able to be tied to that company.
10:19am 20/09/17 Permalink
Zapo
Brisbane, Queensland
3398 posts
I also have no problem with it. If you were a member of a neo-nazi group, or the KKK I think that your employer would be totally justified in sacking you. Also the woman was a contractor - she's not even a full time/part time employee so there's no rights around her employment anyway if you want to get all legal about it.
10:41am 20/09/17 Permalink
cnnnnnn
Other International
19 posts
I have no problem with this. This woman was basically saying "I am going to do my part to deny people rights, because my religion says it should be that way".


she isn't. she simply stated that her moral compass doesn't let voting yes sit well with her because of what she has learnt and seen and came to her own conclusions over

the other one even agreed when TT pushed her on it that she may have gone too far. in that moment if you knew what to listen for you could hear the manipulative enjoyment in her personality, and then the silent dismissal of her responsibility for it. it would have been a more interesting video interview

In other words, she is mentally sick and that illness is now being used to do harm to the lifestyle of others even though it will affect her personally in no way whatsoever.


being gay isn't a right, or is it if you chose to be? the right of marriage which originates from a religious construct shouldn't actually extend to be inclusive of a sexuality that is ultimately sterile in being able to procreate. you are twisting her words to reframe it in the way you can take offense to because you have misunderstood her

This is nothing more than spiteful and vitriolic. Would it also be acceptable if she had said "I am going to do my part to kill X, because my religion says it must be done"? No, it would not. This is no better.


seems like more conflation of the slippery slope reframe. there is no killing of x, y, or anything. it's not about being better or worse, it's about a yes (change the status quo up) or a no (keep it the same way) vote. either way if their parents didn't acknowledge them beforehand this isn't going to somehow magically force them to if it happens to pass for yes

And no company should be required to employ a person who not only expresses that opinion, but does so while being able to be tied to that company.


the value is in the employee's, not in the branding image of 'the company' the only customers that can put up with a personality like her's are current affair hungry easily influenced mothers with a constant need for validating a confirmation bias' on a scheduled basis, usually because of traditional societal confirmation bias'
12:42pm 20/09/17 Permalink
ravn0s
Brisbane, Queensland
19140 posts
she isn't. she simply stated that her moral compass doesn't let voting yes sit well with her because of what she has learnt and seen and came to her own conclusions over


yep, it has nothing to do with her faith...

Madeline said: "I simply can't vote yes without going against my god."
07:36pm 20/09/17 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10644 posts
So are people aware that this vote is not anonymous?

A future Government could come in and imprison you for voting one way ... or the other...

It is so anti-constitutional as to be a joke... But here we are.
08:21pm 20/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39197 posts
There are many huge fails related to this postal survey but I think we should not lose sight of the fact that the biggest fail is that of our political leaders who are using it because they're too gutless and cowardly to actually make a leadership decision.
08:49pm 20/09/17 Permalink
dais
Brisbane, Queensland
12219 posts
Found on Facebook:

"It's my democratic right to vote no"

This is true, but that doesn't mean that voting no doesn't have consequences beyond your casting of a vote.

"I have a right to free speech"

This is also true, but you don't have a right to not be called out on your views. Because others have freedom of speech too.

"I'm sick of being called a homophobe"

Then act in a way which is consistent with ensuring that people who identify as something other than heterosexual have _exactly_ the same rights as heterosexuals.

"But gay people already have the same rights"

If they did, we wouldn't be arguing about extending the ability to lawfully marry, would we?

"I'm okay with gay people having legal recognition of their relationships but just don't call it a marriage"

Such a union would be probably legally distinct from a marriage, then, as if it was legally indistinguishable from marriage it'd be called marriage.

"But my faith tells me that marriage is between a man and a woman"

That's great, you go live your life according to your faith. All we're asking is for you to not force your religious beliefs on others and in return we won't force anyone else's religious beliefs on you.

"But what about the children?"

I agree, it would be awful for LGBTIQ+ children to grow up not being recognised as equal under the law.

"That's not what I mean, I'm talking about the children of gay parents"

So you want them to be forced to grow up in a household where their parents are considered second class citizens?

"No, I mean the harm that studies have shown happens to kids who grow up in households with same sex parents"

That harm occurs not because of any inherent problem with the relationship but because of the intolerance of others who bully same sex couples and their families.

"Well what about the fact that same sex couples can't biologically have children?"

Discounting the fact that there are trans people in same sex relationships that can produce children, the elderly and people with fertility issues also can't have children - do we ban them from getting married?

"I just think kids need to be raised with a mum and a dad"

So what do we do about single parents who are either widowers or end up divorced? Do we take their kids away? Do we force them to stay in relationships? Perhaps it's more important that they be raised in a loving family than how that family is composed.

"But what do I tell my kid if they see a same sex couple who are married?"

Gay people still exist whether their relationships are legally recognised with marriage or not. I'm sure you can figure out how to explain that some people like the opposite sex, some people like the same, and some people like both.

"But what about my right to choose about what my kids are exposed to?"

The world is a big place. You're welcome to put your kids in a private school or home school, and you can still teach them your faith at home, but sooner or later they're going to meet someone who is LGBTIQ+. Wouldn't you prefer to have them not freak out about it and know how to interact with people who are different to them? And if your kids are LGBTIQ+, wouldn't you want them to understand who they are and know that they aren't a freak?

"I'm just worried that I say I'm married to my partner and people think I'm gay"

You could always clarify with husband/wife.

"I just think same sex marriage is wrong"

So don't get one.

"No I mean I don't want other people to have one"

But didn't you say before you were okay with same sex relationships being legally recognised?

"Yeah but I just find the whole gay thing gross, like how can they be attracted to someone of the same sex?"

The same way you're attracted to someone of the opposite sex.

"It's just wrong"

Do you see why people are calling you a homophobe?

"But I'm not! I don't hate gay people"

Then why don't you want them to get married?

"Because it's just not natural"

There are plenty of species out there in nature where homosexuality is part of life.

"But we're not animals"

You mean we're better than they are?

"Yes."

More intelligent? More capable of reason?

"Yeah"

So why don't you recognise that this is an issue of human rights rather than your personal moral code?

"Human rights?"

Yes, the Declaration of Human Rights specifies a right to marry, a right to equal protection under the law, and the right to not suffer discrimination. The spirit of brotherhood is all about ensuring all humans are treated humanely by their governments with the dignity they are born with.

"I'm still allowed to vote no"

You're right, but denying someone a right that you enjoy based solely on their sexuality is homophobic.

"Stop calling me that!"

Then stop doing homophobic things.
09:16pm 20/09/17 Permalink
Twisted
Brisbane, Queensland
12261 posts
So are people aware that this vote is not anonymous?
Sure it is, they have no clue who lifted the mail from your mailbox and voted on your behalf.
09:41pm 20/09/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12897 posts
Tony Abbott has been headbutted by a grub who called him over to shake his hand.
The grub was wearing a YES badge.

Its happened in Hobart outside a Liberal Party function.

wonder how many votes that will lose the Yes campaign ?

08:00pm 21/09/17 Permalink
reload!
Brisbane, Queensland
7733 posts
anyone who cares about tone being headbutted was already voting no
08:20pm 21/09/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2759 posts
Yes, the Declaration of Human Rights specifies a right to marry, a right to equal protection under the law, and the right to not suffer discrimination. The spirit of brotherhood is all about ensuring all humans are treated humanely by their governments with the dignity they are born with


That is actually incorrect.

the universal declaration is ambiguous on if denying marriage to same sex couples is a violation, and the ICCPR is even more so. In fact there is case law stating that two parallel systems doesn't violate the marriage right in the ICCPR.

Not all people get all rights all the time and differential treatment doesn't necessarily equate to discrimination in a legal sense.

Tell your facebook friend do some fact checking.

Is it okay to call this guy a piece of s***?


Take a wild stab in the dark numb nuts.
08:55pm 21/09/17 Permalink
Chancre
Brisbane, Queensland
45 posts
I'd call that a big yes.
09:46pm 21/09/17 Permalink
cnnnnnn
Other International
20 posts
you can see it now can't you

the no vote getting the win and crushing the hopes of strange couples seeking acknowledgement for their weirdness because their parents otherwise won't
11:51pm 21/09/17 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
21367 posts
mr troll account
09:34am 22/09/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40808 posts
Punching nazi's headbutting tone, same same
09:34am 22/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3201 posts
Look, marriage should just be between a man and a woman for procreation, because it says so in the bible (Leviticus 18:22) . Which is why I'm starting a movement to ban marriage for eunuchs, post-menopausal women and the infertile. Also, just like the other passages in Leviticus that are irrefutable laws, nobody will be allowed to eat shellfish, pig, camel, rock badger, rabbit, eagle, vulture, buzzard, falcon, raven, crow, ostrich, owl, seagull, hawk, pelican, stork, heron, bat, winged insects that walk on four legs (unless they have joints to jump with like grasshoppers), bear, mole, mouse, lizard, gecko, crocodile, chameleon nor snail. No tattoos. No round haircuts. No masturbation. Oh, and definitely DEFINITELY no wives defending their husbands by grabbing the attackers genitals - otherwise her hand gets cut off without pity. The movement will be called: 'Actually doing what the bible says, instead of cherry-picking just to discriminate against minorities that make us uncomfortable'.
12:49pm 22/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3202 posts
I think the sacred nature and traditions of marriage as a gift from God are the most valid and important reasons to vote no, heck when I was younger I wanted to be a priest.. However I figured a long time ago that when I became a physician I made an oath, and I must hold myself to standards of 'doing no harm' above all else, even before I am faithful to my own beliefs - simply because there are many others who do not feel the same way. Truthfully, the more I learn about people the more I realise how much I don't know, to the point of being almost completely ignorant to their world, their versions of morality - 'everyone you'll ever meet knows something you don't'. These days I see spirituality as a great strength of an individual, and lots of people unfortunately have not, or cannot find that strength within them, and it is wrong for me to force them to.
12:52pm 22/09/17 Permalink
cnnnnnn
Other International
21 posts
This post has been removed.
Reason: fud
Send Private Message
03:04pm 22/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39198 posts
as soon as I heard that Tony Abbott story, my first reaction was "I wonder if ole Tone would be so base, so craven, so gutless, as to embellish facts to try to get into the spotlight while pushing his spineless agenda even further", but what would be the chances of that

Of course the fact that this guy has been caught & charged already and has just turned out to be a standard issue idiot doesn't excuse his stupid behaviour, but watching the 'no' campaign lie, dissemble and misinform is kind of wearing a bit thin
06:25pm 22/09/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
26043 posts
mr troll account
NMag alt to evade post limiter.
07:06pm 22/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39200 posts
07:12pm 22/09/17 Permalink
Vash
5537 posts
Hanson & other reactionaries are all the same. They keep saying they're being silenced & words misconstrued.
Yet they have more media coverage than most politicians. It certainly isn't against freedom of speech to call out bulls***.
07:35pm 22/09/17 Permalink
Obes
Brisbane, Queensland
10645 posts
Allegedly trog from an organisation that jokingly ran lan comps in Queensland headbutted Tony 'onions' Abbott. No bandanas were injured in the incident. Allegedly!
09:07pm 22/09/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3309 posts
As much as you might despise his politics, I think headbutting Abbott, who's almost 60!?, is a pretty d*** move.
11:42pm 22/09/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2760 posts
response when the 'no' whiners lie about being silenced


That feeling when you complain about fake news and then link to a guardian article which cites a buzzfeed investigation. Oh and minimize an elected politician being assaulted.

Oh and you linked to posters that were "all over Melbourne" but haven't linked to channel ten admitting they photo-shopped them because when they went looking they couldn't find any. You can google that I don't want to ruin the ending for you.
09:26am 23/09/17 Permalink
taggs
6513 posts
TIL what a rock badger is.
09:39am 23/09/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2146 posts
That feeling when you complain about fake news and then link to a guardian article which cites a buzzfeed investigation. Oh and minimize an elected politician being assaulted.

Was the data from the two privately owned analytics firms not enough for you champ?
10:53am 23/09/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
26044 posts
I think he meant to say unelected politician.

edit: also this

https://s26.postimg.org/urs36ho2t/headabbott.png
12:37pm 23/09/17 Permalink
hardware
Brisbane, Queensland
11682 posts
As much as you might despise his politics, I think headbutting Abbott, who's almost 60!?, is a pretty d*** move.
Agreed. If violence against people who hold a differing opinion was okay, the whole human race would be wiped out within hours.
02:55pm 23/09/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
26046 posts
However restricting the rights of individuals based on their sexual orientation causing severe harm to their emotional and physical well-being in a demographic overrepresented in suicide statistics because you don't want to be confused for a homosexual is okay and you all need to stop being so mean to me about it :(

But that's okay though because Jim was patient enough to explain the whole situation to you and you finally see the light! I am confident that the next time you're faced with such a tough moral dilemma you'll remember his wise words and make the correct choice.
03:04pm 23/09/17 Permalink
Zenmaster
Queensland
32 posts
didn't read the whole thread.

People of alternative sexual orientation deserve to be as miserable as the rest of us with failed relationships.

It's a potential win for the Aussie ATO if anything


last edited by Zenmaster at 16:53:30 23/Sep/17
04:52pm 23/09/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2147 posts
05:07pm 23/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39201 posts
^^ like with most of those right wing extremists, they get to their events and find out that most of the people that have been cheering them on online saying they'll turn up to the rally turn out to be on Moscow time
05:52pm 23/09/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12898 posts
Trog, people are afraid to come out(no pun) and support such a march because they will get attacked by the Bolshies. Im not convinced that grub who hit Abbott didnt do it because of the violent climate created by the Bolshies and their latest cause.

who takes the word of a coward that offers his hand in friendship then headbutts someone ?

Another NO campaigner was bullied today and was violently attacked with Fairy Dust.

06:42pm 23/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39204 posts
Trog, people are afraid to come out(no pun) and support such a march because they will get attacked by the Bolshies.
that's a convenient excuse for their no shows! I look forward to seeing this repeated ad nauseum online via Moscow's robot army of big tough Internet warriors! "Oh I was going to come to the rally by I decided to stay behind my keyboard because I was a bit worried about being headbutted by a drunk DJ and getting a very, very, slightly swollen lip"!

It must be super annoying that that last stupid protest turned out to be a completely laughable affair and noone was attacked. I'm waiting for the first news of a confirmed 'false flag' attack though to really spice things up.
Im not convinced that grub who hit Abbott didnt do it because of the violent climate created by the Bolshies and their latest cause.
I actually think it's quite possible the reports of other attacks might have had an effect on this guy's behaviour. But I think it's more likely this guy is just a grandstanding idiot & I hope he is prosecuted the full extent of the law for assault on another citizen. Which, from what I've read, sounds like exactly what is happening.
Another NO campaigner was bullied today and was violently attacked with Fairy Dust.
a claim with no link! why I never. btw did you ever mention the story about Rudd's godson getting bashed or is that not newsworthy

(I like the switch to using the 'Bolshies' term though!! I guess terms like 'commies' and 'socialists' are starting to lose impact, but I'm not sure mainstream Australia is ready for that one)
07:18pm 23/09/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2148 posts

Not many vote no supporters coming out to condemn this recent attack.

http://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/crime/trio-of-drag-queens-saves-man-from-being-bashed-then-starts-on-the-attackers/news-story/e9f4b6e22d5445ea0841e186b2f63d13


Another NO campaigner was bullied today and was violently attacked with Fairy Dust.

Was someone glitter bombed? See above for actual violence.


07:28pm 23/09/17 Permalink
taggs
6515 posts
f*** i cant wait til this is over
11:52pm 23/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39207 posts
f*****g oath
08:00am 24/09/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40809 posts
Agreed
08:35am 24/09/17 Permalink
shody
Brisbane, Queensland
101 posts
"Straight Lives Matter" - I can't even get my head around how they thought that was a good slogan.
10:32am 24/09/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2761 posts
Was the data from the two privately owned analytics firms not enough for you champ?


Data compiled explicitly for the most ideological news outlet in the country. No not really.

btw did you ever mention the story about Rudd's godson getting bashed or is that not newsworthy


Oh good the least honest politician in modern history said it went down that way. Close the books.

Not many vote no supporters coming out to condemn this recent attack.


Link that to the no campaign for us real quick champ.
11:20am 24/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3204 posts
PornoPete, arguably The Perfect Human, questions your stupid data analyses and silly evidence. He only trusts the hard-hitting and rigorously researched literature found in top research journals like the headlines and pictures of The Australian.
03:04pm 24/09/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2763 posts
still haven't found those LWA's have you.

In fact pointing out it seems strange nobody has found them when they *obviously* exist only proves your inherent RWA tendencies.

It's an interesting question why non-WEIRD folks implement LWA politics. must be something to do with being non-western or *un*educated (which is somehow not a nakedly racist thing to say), which is why they universally subscribe to the writings of a western pseudo intellectual.

According to the hard hitting totally credible 'science'

FYI that's an invitation to re-read this thread carefully and confront your biases (to use your wretched term)
03:10pm 24/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3207 posts
You're under attack PP.

The politically correct lefties are coming for you, your rights and your CHURCH.

We're gonna HEADBUTT YA
05:52pm 24/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3208 posts
FYI thanks to the lobbying power of the Australian Christian Lobby, the 'no' vote has recieved 4-5x as much funding as the 'yes' vote in marketing etc, and almost as much more media coverage (3x iirc).

Heaven forbid these Christians actually be Christ-like and lobby for, oh I don't know, increases to our foreign aid to starving children in the third world? No, wait, I mean, more cuts to those evil lefty outlets like the ABC and SBS to fund our MILITARY.

One Nation & AM radio 4eva!!!!one!!
05:57pm 24/09/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2765 posts
you've been drinking again haven't you phooks.

You know as

the resident social scientist


you display a powerful inability for self-assessment. I'd say seek the assistance of a professional but if you're the measure of one it could be considered euthanasia.
07:08pm 24/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3213 posts
Haha yes ya got me I have had 2 or 3. I do love that we've built an understanding after all these posts. You call me an anti-nazi nazi, I call you a white supremacist, we all have fun.
07:21pm 24/09/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2767 posts
Haha yes ya got me I have had 2 or 3


Count it. (I have too)
07:26pm 24/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39208 posts
FYI thanks to the lobbying power of the Australian Christian Lobby, the 'no' vote has recieved 4-5x as much funding as the 'yes' vote in marketing etc, and almost as much more media coverage (3x iirc).
And some idiot on the 'yes' campaign sent out SMS spam. How obnoxious.
10:44pm 24/09/17 Permalink
Zapo
Brisbane, Queensland
3399 posts
This is why getting the public to vote on a topic like this is f*****g stupid.

I have no faith that the generic public en masse has the ability to vote on the question at hand without bringing all the secondary rubbish along with it.

If someone changes their vote to 'no' because they got an SMS - well f*** off.
If someone changes their vote because some d******* wearing a 'vote yes' sticker headbutted Tony Abbott - well f*** off.
If someone changes their vote because of (insert stupid thing to happen during this 'campaign') - well then f*** off.

The thing is...people will have, and the longer this goes on the stronger the no vote - the status quo is going to get.
03:39pm 25/09/17 Permalink
Boxhead
Brisbane, Queensland
12435 posts
I look forward to the No vote winning...

Now stay with me, for entirely different reasons then you want to believe..

Brexit and Trump are sterling examples of what happens when you leave it up to the people in this day and age.. In both of the examples there was a percieved undercurrent of discontent with the manner in which the 'sure-fire win' side went about their business (the 'Stay' campaign and Clinton..) that manifested in a reaction from the voting public that very few predicted could actually happen eg 'Leave' and Trump winning.

Hell even the summaries after Brexit draw a great deal of parallels to our current circumstances.. BBC piece on reasons 'Leave' won.

If 'no' wins will there be political backlash or will the parties blame the public for 'getting it wrong'??? therefore cashing in on the swell of public opinion.

One last query, much like a referendum, results are scrutinised and analysed.. How will Australia react or function knowing XX% of people voted a certain way? Anything over 30-40% of the total votes cast against the winning verdict equates to about 7.5million people who won't agree with the outcome of this.. that's a lot of people..
04:05pm 25/09/17 Permalink
Zapo
Brisbane, Queensland
3400 posts
Boxhead, I'm pretty sure the reason we have the policy that we have is because there are many many people in the government who do NOT want SSM, and would be perfectly happy if it fails.

Turnbull may not, but there will be plently of people on both the liberal and national side who would rejoyce!
04:09pm 25/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39209 posts
Hey Boxhead!! Interesting post and you raise a really important point. If the 'no' vote wins then it might be a catalysing force for good in the sense that it will help us finally start holding the two terrible parties that have been gutless about this issue for years to account. I don't think we exactly need to burn the system to the ground or anything but certainly there will be a strong push no matter what. I suspect Labor are extremely well positioned to capitalise on the fallout.
One last query, much like a referendum, results are scrutinised and analysed.. How will Australia react or function knowing XX% of people voted a certain way? Anything over 30-40% of the total votes cast against the winning verdict equates to about 7.5million people who won't agree with the outcome of this.. that's a lot of people..
Common topic of discussion in the UK; all the Londoners of course think they're the elite & on the side of right and everyone in the country is a scruffy redneck bigot. I think it has been bad for the country as a whole in the short term as it seems to have deepened the divide between "the cities" and "the country" but it has also highlighted the divide between London and everything else (as well as Scotland, etc). But I don't know if there any actual practical long term negatives. Just like how in most countries that have legalised gay marriage, they just move on and everyone gets over it.
06:31pm 25/09/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23776 posts
I think it has been bad for the country as a whole in the short term as it seems to have deepened the divide between "the cities" and "the country" but it has also highlighted the divide between London and everything else (as well as Scotland, etc). But I don't know if there any actual practical long term negatives. Just like how in most countries that have legalised gay marriage, they just move on and everyone gets over it.


you're forgetting the ongoing indignation, self-loathing and disbelief at how racist and bigoted us white folk are. expect the same if "no" wins
06:50pm 25/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39211 posts
you're forgetting the ongoing indignation, self-loathing and disbelief at how racist and bigoted us white folk are. expect the same if "no" wins
expect it? obviously, I'll be a part of it :D

although most of my loathing will be going towards the spineless gutless politicians that decided to send us on this s****how instead of demonstrating the kind of leadership they were elected to provide
06:56pm 25/09/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2774 posts
Brexit and Trump are sterling examples of what happens when you leave it up to the people in this day and age


I couldn't sum up the problem more perfectly if I tried. I think I more or less agree with you except to say I don't want it to take the no vote winning for the point to be demonstrated.

I don't know when we arrived on this planet, but within living memory the prevailing attitude was literally the opposite. Bob Hawke famously said the electorate can generally be relied on to get the big decisions right.

That is still true, and if you think Brexit and Trump are the "wrong" outcome you have frankly failed to interrogate yourself at all. and to be honest if those outcomes weren't a wake up call I don't know what is left that could wake you up.

It is impossible to command the respect of the electorate while you hold them in contempt.

The marriage question is a perfect demonstration of it. The electorate has been willing to have it in an overwhelming majority for nearly a decade. It is the leaders who are behind not the electorate. If the vote fails it will be because the yes campaign have bungled it so badly they made it impossible for people to vote yes.

And here is how it will be bungled. I think the overwhelming majority of Australians have no strong feeling on it, and so will vote yes left to their own devices. This is demonstrated by the fact that while most people would vote for it if asked, they won't switch parties at a general election. There are other more important factors parliamentary elections get decided on.

If you paint the no vote as morally wrong worthy of calling someone who was clearly on the fence "a piece of s***" (as a totally random hypothetical) two things happen. The first is the person called a piece of s*** will (and I'm sure phooks can back this up with hard hitting research) dig the heals in *only because* you called them a piece of s***. The second is the silent majority will see someone who is plainly not a bigot in any relevant sense being more or less slandered and take note. They won't tell you they are voting no, they just will.

It happened in Brexit and it happened in the US election and as far as I can see it happening now in this marriage vote.

Take for example the text message thing. There is literally laws about unsolicited messaging because of how invasive people find it. I was with people who had already voted yes who got it and their unprompted response was "oh just leave me alone". But Plibersek was out there saying oh it isn't a big deal.

Well here's the thing. If the electorate responds badly to it, its a big deal whether you like it or not, and the *single* worst thing you can do is say oh well the no side has done way worse.

Holding the moral high ground and "the ends justify the means" are fundamentally irreconcilable. So not only does the yes campaign engage in moral hectoring which is already an incredibly risky political tactic they do it hypocritically, virtually guaranteeing a backlash.

Campaigning this way allows the No vote to be for two distinct propositions. the explicit marriage question, and the implicit respect of the electorate question. If you campaign in away that makes the answer to both questions diverge, you can expect people to vote no on the simple grounds that you can't demand respect without giving it first.

anyway its a bit ramblomatic so now seems like a good time to stop.
08:17pm 25/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3220 posts
This just in: groundbreaking research from the UQ Institute for Social Science finds people voting no are empirically stupid.
11:45am 26/09/17 Permalink
cnnnnnn
Other International
23 posts
the comments there sum up the article
12:06pm 26/09/17 Permalink
paveway
Brisbane, Queensland
21368 posts
i just heard on the radio the no vote side did the same SMS thing this morning lol

i didn't get either

so ronery :(
12:26pm 26/09/17 Permalink
Jim
UK
13731 posts
However restricting the rights of individuals based on their sexual orientation causing severe harm to their emotional and physical well-being in a demographic overrepresented in suicide statistics because you don't want to be confused for a homosexual is okay and you all need to stop being so mean to me about it :(

But that's okay though because Jim was patient enough to explain the whole situation to you and you finally see the light! I am confident that the next time you're faced with such a tough moral dilemma you'll remember his wise words and make the correct choice.


One of the important reasons we engage in discussion or argument about things is because we might not have considered or even heard all factors related to an issue. You might not have encountered hardware's reasons for being apprehensive about a yes vote on this issue, or he might not be aware of all the difficulties faced by same-sex couples due to their sexual orientation.

I'm pretty sure that in spite of earlier saying you don't care, your desired outcome for this specific issue is that everyone gets equal treatment with regard being allowed to get married - right?
If so, how do you think calling someone a piece of s***, telling them that they need to die and misrepresenting their position or character, furthers that cause?
I would argue that you're potentially contributing to the problem instead of helping solve it because they seem to be tactics less likely to illicit an unemotional response. We need unemotional responses from people if we want to convince them to support marriage equality.

If you think these comments are hypocritical coming from me, you're probably right - this forum is testament to the stupid s*** I've said to other people over the years. I don't think that makes my comments here any less valid though.
12:42pm 26/09/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3221 posts
the comments there sum up the article



They sure do.
01:28pm 26/09/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12904 posts
Christians arent the only ones being persecuted...
Now its Maths under attack

One of the country's top universities has warned maths students not to use the term 'marriage' when referring to a well-known theorem because the word may cause 'offence.'

The theorem was proved by Phillip Hall in 1935 and relies on the standard example of matchmaking men and women to represent two distinct sets. The move by the University of New South Wales comes as student groups clash on campuses around the country on same sex marriage.

UNSW honours student Sean Lynch told Sky News that his lecturer asked students not to refer to the theorem as Hall's Marriage Theorem in an assignment.

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-stories/2017/09/26/unsw-lecturer-deems--marriage--offensive.html
06:43pm 26/09/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
26050 posts
Because I think the comments I make on this forum are of infinitesimal consequence on whether the vote eventually goes yes or no. I don't know and don't want to know anyone who will be voting no on this (except maybe some old people who my hurry up and die comment was meant for) so the catharsis of calling them pieces of s*** is kind of hard to resist.

I don't have the patience to deal with it how you did. Because while it looks as you may have gotten through to him (personally I think he's full of s*** and just used the opportunity to vindicate his own comments about people being mean to him) I am wondering what will happen the next time he's faced with such a choice. Does there need to be someone there to explain the obvious to him every single time? Because there won't be.
07:57pm 26/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39215 posts
Does there need to be someone there to explain the obvious to him every single time? Because there won't be.
Maybe it's just a case of having the one person explain things to them in the right way that actually makes them think about things different.

I struggle with exactly what you are talking about every day. For some f*****g stupid reason one of the first things I do in the morning is read some stuff on Twitter. Almost every day I read some dumb s*** some idiot has said or retweeted into my timeline (I follow a few people intentionally to bust my filter bubble) and so my day regularly starts with me being pissed off because a significant amount of my energy goes into not replying to them.

Twitter is a piece of s*** for discourse because it is limited by design in presenting and having complex arguments but also totally awesome for just regurgitating standard talking points. (Not to mention that a significant number of entities on there are just Russian trolls.)

I feel like the right kind of discourse can change people's opinions though - e.g. I think infi's acknowledgement of his holding two conflicting opinions on this topic (liberty vs tradition) is a good step forward. I know that plok became a vegetarian after convincing himself while debating with someone on this forum. My opinions on drugs changed as a result of discussion here (but mostly after conversation with my 90yo grandfather who convinced me in like 15 minutes of discussion); you can probably watch the evolution of my thinking on the topic in my posts here (I used to be hugely anti-drug and now am not).

I think I am staggeringly bad at trying to change people's mind because I have traditionally had too much fun dissecting bad arguments and logical fallacies; I suspect that is in many cases just as bad as telling people they're being d****. Time to buy some Scott Adams books and become a Master Persuader!
08:20pm 26/09/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
26051 posts
I think infi's acknowledgement of his holding two conflicting opinions on this topic (liberty vs tradition) is a good step forward
Except that he denied this very thing was taking place and went on about the LGBT mental illness industry and some other mumbo jumbo that made no sense whatsoever. I barely know plok but from what I've seen he seems like he may not be a complete a******. This is the starting point you need to be at to allow people to change your terrible opinions on things and infi is nowhere near it. He can't even venture outside the safety of whatever Trump worshipping reddit he posts in now.

I just don't see how you can be a grown adult and think SSM is a bad thing for any reason. If you're that far down the rabbit hole you're a total lost cause. Only some sort of deep personal experience is going to be able to change your mind. Words on a forum aren't going to have any effect on people like that.
08:59pm 26/09/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23777 posts
I just don't see how you can be a grown adult and think SSM is a bad thing for any reason. If you're that far down the rabbit hole you're a total lost cause. Only some sort of deep personal experience is going to be able to change your mind. Words on a forum aren't going to have any effect on people like that.


Replace SSM with Brexit in that post and it sounds hilarious. Fpot knows best! Everyone who disagrees should die. Way to keep being irrelevant.
09:02pm 26/09/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12905 posts
I just don't see how you can be a grown adult and think SSM is a bad thing for any reason.


https://i.imgur.com/TaTTmJq.jpg
09:08pm 26/09/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2775 posts
Because I think the comments I make on this forum are of infinitesimal consequence on whether the vote eventually goes yes or no,


This is wrong though isn't it. The way people conduct themselves online is having an effect on politics.

Specifically:

so the catharsis of calling them pieces of s*** is kind of hard to resist.
Does there need to be someone there to explain the obvious to him every single time?

What's the obvious fpot?

And why is this

so the catharsis of calling them pieces of s*** is kind of hard to resist.


The next stop? You could've have just said nothing. and old people should hurry up and die oh great well thats much better.

If you can't resist telling old people they should die, why should anyone take you seriously on anything you claim requires compassion?

Seems like any claim grounded in apparent compassion can be grounded in the need to been seen to say you care, and if you can't help yourself telling old people to die, kinda rules out the first ground.

I just don't see how you can be a grown adult and think SSM is a bad thing for any reason.


How you you think you are in a position to call anyone stupid is utterly beyond me.
09:18pm 26/09/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2149 posts
If only there was a progressive party that has always endorsed same sex marriage that you could vote for next election Faceman? Now that your dad will likely be booted out of the Senate!?
09:23pm 26/09/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2776 posts
does that progressive party accept the science about anything other than climate change?
09:31pm 26/09/17 Permalink
Vash
5538 posts
If only there was a progressive party that has always endorsed same sex marriage that you could vote for next election Faceman? Now that your dad will likely be booted out of the Senate!?


Indeed. We should reward such parties for being ahead of the times on many issues.
10:13pm 26/09/17 Permalink
Jim
UK
13732 posts
Discussion online has a relatively unique attribute which is observers of the discussion. The arguments and responses put forth aren't just for the benefit of the people directly participating but also those that silently read. Several of the science communication pages I follow and groups I'm a member of which discuss contentious topics such as genetic engineering of crops, chemical pest management in agriculture, vaccination, water fluoridation etc, often highlight this point.

The vast majority of the time when I respond to comments where I see someone post some falsehood on these topics, I have little to no faith that the person is even interested whatsoever in objectively examining the subject but there's a chance that people who read the comment and replies might. And the times where it does seem like the person is genuinely interested in hearing responses to their comment is where I actually find it easier not to respond like a knob
12:52am 27/09/17 Permalink
Sir Redhat
Sydney, New South Wales
2150 posts

does that progressive party accept the science about anything other than climate change?

I think the only thing they could be anti science on would be GMO?

Here's some science lel:
http://www.afr.com/news/politics/researcher-says-gaymarriage-opponents-less-intelligent-20170926-gyoryk
04:51pm 27/09/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2777 posts
I think the only thing they could be anti science on would be GMO?


Can probably broaden that out to genetics, and nuclear energy, and the environmental cost of dealing with old solar panels, and the cause of gas fires on the condamine river, and economics in general.

Here's some science lel:


Guess you weren't in their sample hey champ.
06:27pm 27/09/17 Permalink
Nmag
Sydney, New South Wales
843 posts
I'd like to vote against what ever the greens want, but I already said I voted 'yes' up there somewhere. I voted yes and need to put it in the mail box.

It's a yes against religion, and a yes to let the pillow biters and carpet munchers, and people who don't want to have a gender, but have much agenda.. be allowed to marry a potato if they like.
09:14pm 27/09/17 Permalink
RuleofBooKz
Melbourne, Victoria
1673 posts
do we spend hundreds of millions on the military every year? Can we move on? We dont need these distractions
02:20pm 29/09/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3310 posts
I agree with what boxhead, pp, trog and Jim are saying.

There's no such thing as lost causes in this game, unless they're like 80+ and might actually die relatively soon - morally questionable, and that's still prime voting electorate anyway!

That's the fundamental flaw of this extreme (c***ish) left politik that we're seeing on these big cultural issues. You can't persuade people through abuse or contempt (that's like the first rule in all persuasion books!), and instead of just failing to persuade them you're also pushing them over to your opposition, and then you lose the issue. Those people you turned against you aren't going anywhere. Generational change, presuming you get the mess that is education sorted out, takes literal generations!

A fun (and pretty loose) analogy? Jon Snow saved the wildlings instead of fighting them, at great political cost (they stabbed him to death yo), because to not do so would have just created more soldiers for the army of the dead that they'd then have to fight later on.

What I don't get is the left's strategy here - what are you going to do if it's a no vote? Call everyone bigots (again) and then.... profit?

tbh I am kind of sadly expecting no to win, just like Brexit and Trump.
11:06pm 29/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39222 posts
tbh I am kind of sadly expecting no to win, just like Brexit and Trump.
I feel like it's going to come down to the no shows. All I know is, no matter what happens, I'm blaming the politicians
02:00am 30/09/17 Permalink
Zapo
Brisbane, Queensland
3402 posts
What I don't get is the left's strategy here - what are you going to do if it's a no vote? Call everyone bigots (again) and then.... profit?


I think the strategy will be for the ALP to say the entire process was f***ed, they opposed it at the start and blah blah, and then we need to try and get the ALP elected at the next election.

While I'm hoping the vote doesn't go 'no', I am trying to prepare myself for that eventuality. What I can say is that I understand why people are angry, I am angry. I'm pretty confident the vast majority of people who I know will be voting 'yes' and I don't believe it's likely I can convince the random public so I try not to try.

There are extreme elements to both sides of this, and I hope that people aren't voting 'no' because they believe the 'yes' campaign are a bunch of bullies.

My view is if someone was on the fence and votes 'no' because of the bully argument, well, I really question whether they were on the fence anyway.

People have been physically assaulted, verbally abused and had their property damaged for being on the 'yes' side....I think that response is more extreme than what the 'yes' side are doing - but again, I think it's a fringe element.

Also, just remember, there many many gay people who have been bullied, shamed and abused their entire life by genuine homophobic bigots. Every "It's OK to vote no" is in a way a rallying cry, a reminder to those times in your life when you've felt unsafe and ostracised for being gay. Well, at least it brings that up for me.

I dunno, I just think if you look at things from balance it's not even close to being similar.

last edited by Zapo at 04:51:47 30/Sep/17
04:50am 30/09/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40814 posts
i honestly cant see no getting up.

if it does, im going to feel even sadder about my society than i already do :(
05:56am 30/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39223 posts
^ great post. imagine the complete s***fight that the next election might be as a result of this. If 'yes' wins, the Liberals will have to push legislation through or else they're dooming themselves to getting voted out for sure (because F*** YOU for making us pay for this stupid thing and then not going through with it). Then the next election they'll have to totally ignore the issue - I can't see any way they can double down hard on it. The really "principled" Liberals who are the reason we're in this boat will obviously be far too gutless to splinter cell and go independent/create their own new party, so presumably they'll have to be noisy about it within the Liberal framework so that it becomes a big media issue, despite not really part of the core party election platform, because they can't afford it to be.

If 'no' wins, Labor can basically campaign on nothing but that, right? And win, because the Liberals will have to campaign on the opposite side and they'll look like f*****g idiots for not having the balls to come out and just say no in the first place and make it an election issue.

Holy s*** it is going to be a f*****g horrible nightmare.
06:12am 30/09/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2787 posts
My view is if someone was on the fence and votes 'no' because of the bully argument, well, I really question whether they were on the fence anyway.


This is why you fail. If your starting point is can't win don't try then you've got some chutzpah claiming if people are worried about bullying they were always no. The exact opposite played out in front of your eyes in this thread.

How is this difficult to grasp.

I know it feels good to be part of a tribe. And if you want a broad political consensus that's the instinct you have to fight every step of the way.

People have been physically assaulted, verbally abused and had their property damaged for being on the 'yes' side


This has happened to people on the No side as well. People have been fired for saying it's ok to say no. People have attempted to get that "vote no" sky writing charged as hate speech.

Also, just remember, there many many gay people who have been bullied, shamed and abused their entire life by genuine homophobic bigots.


That is not a justification. And sits at the core of the problem. This is classic eye for an eye thinking, and if you want to divide people its a guaranteed winner.

If 'no' wins, Labor can basically campaign on nothing but that, right?


That's when the libs point out they have a plan for maybe 5% of the country (which they have backflipped on in the last 4 years) and nothing else.

Labor making the next election about gay marriage will end in three more years for liberal. Labor was in power for six years and could have done something. They didn't. Shorten making this another great moral challenge of our times, well how'd that work out for Rudd?

You just keep the electorates mind on the fact notorious homophobe penny wong said marriage is between a man and woman for most of her political career, and then keep talking about how state labor renewable energy targets are f*****g up power bills.

A general election will not be decided on this issue. Ever.
08:25am 30/09/17 Permalink
sLaps_Forehead
Brisbane, Queensland
7725 posts
How most sensible people feel about this issue:

WHO F***** CARES ~ A PYRAMID OF ZERO F**** GIVEN

/ end thread
09:12am 30/09/17 Permalink
Zapo
Brisbane, Queensland
3403 posts
This has happened to people on the No side as well. People have been fired for saying it's ok to say no. People have attempted to get that "vote no" sky writing charged as hate speech.


Are you seriously trying to compare what has happened in the last few weeks of this campaign to the BS, discrimination and abuse that gay people including myself have had to deal with for our entire lives?

There have been f***wits on BOTH sides of this in the last few weeks, but I am just dumbfounded to think that anyone with a inch of compassion and empathy and f*****g logical thinking could think that ANYONE in the NO campaign has suffered more than gay people and therefore someone should vote NO because of the bullies from the yes side.

Again, I just cannot believe you can compare what's happened with gay people in the last 5-10-20-30+ years and just be like, yep, those yes bullies, the no people are the real victims here.

If someone is voting no for whatever other f*****' reason - yeah whatever, move on. But if someone has SERIOUSLY decided to vote no because of the yes bullies, then they need their head f*****g checked, and again, I can't imagine they would have voted yes anyway.

last edited by Zapo at 14:07:25 30/Sep/17
02:05pm 30/09/17 Permalink
Twisted
Brisbane, Queensland
12264 posts
Again, I just cannot believe you can compare what's happened with gay people in the last 5-10-20-30+ years
You mean since the establishment of religious organisations thousands of years ago who began to think for and dictate morals to the great masses of sheeple.
This has happened to people on the No side as well. People have been fired for saying it's ok to say no. People have attempted to get that "vote no" sky writing charged as hate speech.
People have been bashed, murdered, had their houses burned down, lost their jobs/careers/livelihoods/families for a long time for coming out or being outed as a homosexual. I think it is an extreme reaction to lose your job over a belief, but hey we fired a guy once who couldn't work under a woman. He was some sort of crazy religious Muslim dude, just said he would not be dictated to by a woman. Cya mate, f*** off and don't let the door hit you on the way out. So I guess people lose their jobs for their beliefs all the time right?

Still, it doesn't make it right that people lose their job after announcing no support, but I dare say these people crying about losing their job now and their supporters weren't exactly taking to the street because a gay person experienced work place bullying or lost their job due to their sexual orientation. So....you know maybe karma or something?
02:46pm 30/09/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39225 posts
How most sensible people feel about this issue:

WHO F***** CARES ~ A PYRAMID OF ZERO F**** GIVEN

/ end thread
that is because most people don't think about rights or liberties until theirs are directly threatened
05:31pm 30/09/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
26058 posts
Voting no because of bullies is a bulls*** excuse used so the especially cowardly homophobes can blame others for their prejudice.
07:41pm 30/09/17 Permalink
FaceMan
Brisbane, Queensland
12908 posts
RAINBOW flags and ‘yes’ or ‘no’ slogans have been banned from tonight’s rugby league Grand Final and will be seized by security officers making compulsory bag checks.

Both the National Rugby League and ANZ Stadium have declared any politically themed item that might ‘upset other patrons’ will be confiscated, along with any other supporter flags and banners over ‘novelty’ size, measuring 1.4m.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/nrl-grand-final-flag-ban-security-will-search-fans-bags-and-confiscate-rainbow-flags/news-story/12c17e95419370a55e1eef79dd9e35be?


01:33pm 01/10/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2790 posts
Are you seriously trying to compare what has happened in the last few weeks of this campaign to the BS, discrimination and abuse that gay people including myself have had to deal with for our entire lives?


Are you seriously trying to say that is relevant to the conduct of a campaign?

Like it or not you need to persuade people in a vote. That's the reality mate. and this s***

but I am just dumbfounded to think that anyone with a inch of compassion and empathy and f*****g logical thinking could think that ANYONE in the NO campaign has suffered more than gay people and therefore someone should vote NO because of the bullies from the yes side.


And this s***

If someone is voting no for whatever other f*****' reason - yeah whatever, move on. But if someone has SERIOUSLY decided to vote no because of the yes bullies, then they need their head f*****g checked, and again, I can't imagine they would have voted yes anyway.


Is hurting not helping. Get comfortable with the no vote winning if that's your attitude. The correct attitude is every no voter is an opportunity.
02:14pm 01/10/17 Permalink
Zapo
Brisbane, Queensland
3404 posts
Dude, I can tell you why the people in the YES campaign are so angry, I explained that earlier.

Why are the people on the no campaign so angry? Why is there property damage, and disgusting slogans and imagery? Why is there physical abuse?

Because at it's core the people impacted by the YES campaign are gay people who have been dealing with s*** their whole lives about their sexuality and they're angry that the people who have abused them and called them f***** all their lives get a vote on their relationship.

Why are people on the NO campaign so violent and angry to the YES campaign - it's because they're bigots who hate f*****s, that's why.

The more moderate people on the no campaign probably still hate f***, but they need to come up with a better narriative then we hate f*** - so they came up with religious protections, safe schools - that's a good one, gender theory, um, freedom of speech...have I missed anything it's such a wide net they cast.

Then, I'm sure there's a whole heap of people who have just been pulled into the no campaign who probably don't really give a s*** either way, but given teh Aussie conservative bent they've been dragged into the NO side...because it's safer to just say no to something if it doesn't impact you directly..... and I'm 100% sure there are people who are voting NO because of the YES bullies...when as I said earlier, if you look at the big picture it's pretty absurd to think someone would vote that way.

Finally, I'm not actually posting on here to convince anyone of anything, I think the reality is you cannot really convince someone on this issue unless you ahve a relationship with them in the first place - or are in a position to influence ie a public figure already. I'm using more colourful language than I would otherwise, but if you stop being such a ponce the core of what I'm saying is actually pretty valid.
02:46pm 01/10/17 Permalink
Vash
5550 posts
Well said Zapo.
The 'No' voters being angry is simply because they're being called out for their views, and they don't like them being challenged. If someone is voting No purely because the most popular opinion seems to be 'Yes' then they are just the kind of selfish people most don't want anything to do with, and probably have some deep seated dislike of homosexuality.
There is literally no argument for the 'No' campaign that has any weight that i've seen.
03:03pm 01/10/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2793 posts
Just so we are on the same page my partner and I have already voted yes.

I know you can explain why some folks are angry zapo. and I can understand why *some* people on the YES side get so angry.

But the truth is the rights issues can be addressed without the need to call a formal recognition of a private relationship "marriage". For what its worth, I agree that while that road could satisfy the technical requirements of legal rights it creates two sets of relationship, which while legally equivalent may not be seen by the entire community as such.

But if that's the road you want to take (ie this about something more than a purely legalistic problem) then the religious definition has to get an airing.

If you're annoyed about people getting a vote on your relationship, I hate to break it to you, but that is simply unavoidable in Australia's constitutional framework. If it isn't a plebiscite, then its a parliamentary vote which is merely a matter of degree not category (and lets not forget that the vast majority of these parliamentarians were perfectly happy to say no categorically until very recently), and if you think a plebiscite is ugly, how do you think a general election where the politician's skin is actually in the game is going to go?

The overwhelming majority of people have no strong conviction on this matter. which I might add is a logical consequence of the yes campaign's strongest argument. I have no business judging other people's private relationships.

But everyone has family who aren't bigoted but maybe driven by religious conviction, and you go spraying the B word around, well see how that goes.

Why are people on the NO campaign so violent and angry to the YES campaign - it's because they're bigots who hate f*****s, that's why.

The more moderate people on the no campaign probably still hate f***, but they need to come up with a better narriative then we hate f*** - so they came up with religious protections, safe schools - that's a good one, gender theory, um, freedom of speech...have I missed anything it's such a wide net they cast.


You need to ditch this attitude zapo. It is no different to the no campaign saying yes campaigners hate traditional values and want to rip up the fabric of society.
03:12pm 01/10/17 Permalink
Zapo
Brisbane, Queensland
3405 posts
If someone in my family immediate or otherwise felt that my partner of 10 years and I didn't deserve the right to marry you can bet there would be some serious conversation and debate.

Ultimately if they still maintained that position I would not look to continue a relationship with them. Thankfully I'm not in this position. We have both had people who we've talked around, who have seen our relationship and changed their mind.

If someone claimed it was for religious reasons I don't care. That's not a trump card. Religion doesn't absolve you from being bigoted.... I'm really sorry,it doesn't.
05:39pm 01/10/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2795 posts
Zapo I can understand why you would do that.

But we are talking about different things. That is a perfectly acceptable way to conduct your personal affairs, and more power to you.

It is not an *effective* way to muster political consensus. Whether you like it or not that is where we are and it is what has to be done.

Imagine rather than it being yourself, it's is someone with no strong conviction and no personal connection to you, and their parent is a no campaigner on religious grounds.

You *don't have a right* to expect of them a response that is anything even remotely similar to what you would do, and if you're opening gambit is "oh your religious parent who I know nothing else about is a hate filled bigot", what do you think their response is going to be?

It's probably going to be something along the lines of "you don't know a damn thing about me, go away".
07:29pm 01/10/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39229 posts
RAINBOW flags and ‘yes’ or ‘no’ slogans have been banned from tonight’s rugby league Grand Final and will be seized by security officers making compulsory bag checks.
Actual, literal fake news, it seems

Just a general flag ban if they're stupidly oversized

Did the world end after Macklemore's song or what?
08:07pm 01/10/17 Permalink
infi
Brisbane, Queensland
23782 posts
I didn't watch the political statement.
09:38pm 01/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3223 posts

Nobody Complained When The Grand Final Had A Song About A Bloke Killing His Girlfriend

If you go back through the entertainment at both the NRL and AFL grand finals in recent years, you'll inevitably bump into songs that were plain offensive, or that had political messages of all stripes -- yet which no one complained about.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2017/09/28/nobody-complained-when-the-grand-final-had-a-song-about-a-bloke-killing-his-girlfriend_a_23225813/
09:50pm 01/10/17 Permalink
Phooks
Brisbane, Queensland
3224 posts
The ABS will publish the results on its website on November 15. The Chief Statistician will also give an analysis of the survey’s integrity.

In the event of a 'Yes' vote, the government says it will allow a private member's bill to be introduced to the House of Representatives in the final parliamentary sitting fortnight of 2017 (which begins in the last week of November).

Members of parliament would then be given a free vote.

The bill is widely expected to pass in this case. Parliamentarians will not be bound by the results of the postal survey, but many, including some conservatives who oppose same-sex marriage, have promised to respect the decision of the people even if it goes against their personal beliefs.

If the people vote "No" in the postal ballot, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said no bill would proceed.

Labor leader Bill Shorten has promised to introduce a bill to legalise same-sex marriage in his first 100 days as prime minister if he wins the next election.
09:51pm 01/10/17 Permalink
Zapo
Brisbane, Queensland
3406 posts
If the point that you're trying to make is that if you want to engage with people and help win the vote then you need to do so without being an a******* and don't call people who may otherwise vote no bigots and the like....then yeah, I agree with you.

I did not come on here to convince anyone to change their vote to yes over no. I don't engage with random members of the public to discuss their vote, I've influenced people in my life who I have interacted with directly by being in a romantic relationship with my partner for 10 years. That's the most powerful way to convince people.

The only reason I came on here was to defend some of the comments that gay people on the 'yes' side have made, and some of their more aggressive behaviour. I don't think it helps wins the minds and hearts of people who are on the fence - but I empathise with it. When you're under attack you fight back, and we are under attack at the moment.

I don't know you, I don't know what your life has been like. My life since coming out has been pretty good all things considered, but still filled with abuse. I still find it hard to hold hands with my partner in public, and maybe that's just me but after you've almost been bashed by a group of f***wits for doing it, and you've been yelled abuse by random strangers a dozen times you kidna just stop - which I know is 'letting them win'...but still.

I other other gay people who have had it far far worse. Who have had some of their immediate family essentially disown them, and who have actually been physically attacked....and to be clear i don't know a whole heap of gay people either. 99% of my friends are straight.

So, I can totally 100% empathise with the angry 'yes' people. The vitriol going on at the moment is disgusting. The stop the f*** signs with the rainbow nooses. The constant comments about being a pedophile and the 'rainbow agenda'. It's seriously bring up a lot of serious s*** for people.

I know your argument from earlier, I know it doesn't win people over and we need to rise above it....but for most gay people this isn't a f*****g 3 month campaign it's their bloody life...it hurts a bit more for us.

So yeah, I'm not trying to be political, I'm just trying to show that this - for a lot of people, and especially gay people is VERY f*****g emotional. Whether you believe it's the same for the staunch defenders of the NO vote is up to you, but I think that's just madness IMO.

I really think people were the most informed they could be about this 6 months ago. I think what's happened in the last few months is horrible, and funnily enough I said it was going to go this way, and it is.

Anyway, it's early, I've had a s*** sleep...not correcting mistakes :)
06:23am 02/10/17 Permalink
trog
AGN Admin
Other International
39230 posts
Great post dude and please know that I and basically everyone I know is behind you 100%.
07:01pm 02/10/17 Permalink
Viper119
Other International
3313 posts
Kudos to you Zapo, I'm also totes with you.

What I'm talking about is the campaign approach or attitude, not the issue itself, and not just this issue, but all the big left v right cultural issues across the Western world from Brexit to Trump. And how that approach is proving to not only be counterproductive, but is also tangibly changing the outcome. While many are seemingly conflating disagreement with the campaign to disagreement on the issue, that's not the case, for me at any rate. Likewise I'm not disregarding the fact that the right's approach to campaigning is also all sorts of wrong. Really it's a discussion on the deteriorating nature of the political discourse at large I suppose.

It doesn't make sense to me that anyone pro a progressive issue is decoupling themselves from that problem and sticking to a scorched earth style policy. We're never going to get any political consensus that way which means we'll never get anywhere. It's slightly amazing to me that I side with fpot on all these issues, yet find his discourse on them repugnant (no offence old bean).

Anyway, here's to hoping the Aussie public comes through and we see a yes win!
08:35pm 02/10/17 Permalink
Spook
Brisbane, Queensland
40817 posts
I didn't watch the political statement.


you missed some awesome entertainment.
09:19pm 02/10/17 Permalink
Insom
Brisbane, Queensland
4617 posts
trog from a few pages back

there are f***wits on both sides, but when you single out one of the f***wits (... without a link? no idea who Benjamin Law is) without noting others it seems a bit unfair, even if you ignore the fact that one of the sides is literally a relic from the iron age


fair enough, I guess it wasn't a fully-formed theory, just a kernel of an idea that I have

namely, that it seems that those prominent voices on the progressive side of social justice issues, that can claim to be armed with logic/science/data/etc, often resort to hectoring and browbeating the other side anyway - in other words, squandering the moral high ground

meanwhile, the FUD, quote mining, and straight up dishonesty is the proclivity of the right

I understand the passions of someone like Benjamin Law (a gay author and columnist) on this issue might be somewhat raw but directing this kind of vitriol at conservative politicians gets the cause nowhere
12:26am 03/10/17 Permalink
Zapo
Brisbane, Queensland
3407 posts
Stolen from a Facebook post. What's the worst the yes campaign has done?

Some facts :

Kevin Rudd's godson, Sean Foster, was brutally bashed for supporting marriage equality.

A 14 year old girl was sent death threats for posting a status in support of marriage equality.

A priest from a church organisation officially associated with the 'No' campaign threatened to kill gay couples with his shotgun.

A group of No supporters ran around with knives in a carpark slashing tyres while owners watched a gay play inside.

Countless people have had homophobic slurs and nazi symbols drawn on their marriage equality signs and on their property.

The AFL stated their support for marriage equality and the next day got a bomb threat.

A man called the ABC radio and claimed that Hitler did the right thing in trying to exterminate homosexuals.

Lyle Shelton publically backed conversion therapy for LGBTI children.

A neo-nazi group posted flyers that labelled gay people pedophiles; using false data that has been championed by people in the No campaign.

A trans teen was a assulted by a man twice her age at a mall in Hobart.

A woman had her windows smashed in for supporting marriage equality, while people screamed "f*****" from outside.

It's time for the NO campaign to stop pretending that their campaign isn't generating violence. If you know people who haven't voted yet, ask them to #VoteYES or this violent behaviour will be normalised after the postal survey.

Sources:

bit.ly/PhobicViolence
bit.ly/RuddGodson
bit.ly/14yoGirlThreat
bit.ly/ShotgunWeddings2
bit.ly/LyleConversion
bit.ly/TyreKnives
bit.ly/TransTeen
bit.ly/NeoBlitzUTAS
08:50am 03/10/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9506 posts
I don't think there's any question that if you took the worst people from society and had to turf them in one group or the other, it wouldn't just be a clear majority end up in the 'no' bucket - it would be closer to 80-90% end up in the 'no' bucket.
10:23am 03/10/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18461 posts

There have been f***wits on BOTH sides of this in the last few weeks, but I am just dumbfounded to think that anyone with a inch of compassion and empathy and f*****g logical thinking could think that ANYONE in the NO campaign has suffered more than gay people and therefore someone should vote NO because of the bullies from the yes side.


Suffering is subjective.

You feel your suffering has been significant, potentially causing extreme distress at times. Therefor your voice should be heard, listened to and validated.

However, you should be heard, listened to and validated simply because you are you, not due to the measure of your suffering.
For example, is your suffering really that significant when compared to the suffering of an orphaned starving child in war-torn country with no conceivable way out, no hope?

Yes. Yes it is. As you are the one feeling it, it's your suffering. A person can be in excruciating emotional pain and people around them may not even know. That person can be suffering to the point of suicide, yet people may not be aware, they see a person going to work, having a family, they seem to crack a joke, etc. Yet their suffering must be extreme if they get to the point of suicide.

So that empathy and compassion you speak of, perhaps you need to engage it to these people that say 'no'. Why do they say that, what has happened to them in their lives that have caused them to feel that saying 'No' is the appropriate response to this survey?

They have just as much right to feel validated as you do, as we all do.

If you want a chance of helping them change their minds, you have to first validate their feelings on this matter. Which can be incredibly hard if you are in great pain yourself. Compassion is the key to overcoming this pain and can go a very, very long way in disarming a defensive person and allowing their rational mind to make more informed decisions.
As when a person has hit that reactionary stage, their rational thinking is overwhelmed by the emotional response, in other words their rational thinking is impaired.
11:42am 03/10/17 Permalink
baz
Victoria
1320 posts
what will be the gay alcohol and drug fundraiser trendiness if the Sydney Gay and Les Mardi Gras becomes about boring couples married with children struggling to pay bills and living expenses because they have made this commitment of marraige to each other



Children?
10:57pm 03/10/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2797 posts
Come on now Zapo.

If you're trying to link the no campaign to nazis you lose.

It makes this difficult to take seriously

So yeah, I'm not trying to be political


Go and reread this thread and tell me which way the vitriol has gone?

for a lot of people, and especially gay people is VERY f*****g emotional.


For gay people I'm willing to cut some slack. I don't think it is justifiable but I understand it. For people who aren't gay, there is no excuse *at all*, the fact they can work themselves up into an emotional state is evidence of their lack of commitment not the other way around.

but for most gay people this isn't a f*****g 3 month campaign it's their bloody life


Yep and the outcome will have an effect on their lives for a lot longer than 3 months. It is precisely for this reason, calm honest debate needs to prevail. Suggesting that the no campaign is enabling nazis isn't that.

I'm sure that you can go and find a facebook page with just as much s*** on the yes campaign.
07:29am 04/10/17 Permalink
Twisted
Brisbane, Queensland
12266 posts
For people who aren't gay, there is no excuse *at all*, the fact they can work themselves up into an emotional state is evidence of their lack of commitment not the other way around.
I don't even know what you're trying to say here...what is this is supposed to mean? People get emotional with everything from a TV show to their footy team.
09:20am 04/10/17 Permalink
shody
Brisbane, Queensland
106 posts
For people who aren't gay, there is no excuse *at all*, the fact they can work themselves up into an emotional state is evidence of their lack of commitment not the other way around.


https://www.google.com/search?q=empathy
09:40am 04/10/17 Permalink
Tollaz0r!
Brisbane, Queensland
18464 posts

It is precisely for this reason, calm honest debate needs to prevail.


It does.

Which is precisely why this survey should never have happened and should have been left to the senate. Which, I presume, is precisely why the LNP out it out to the public, to make it an emotional issue. However, I cannot understand why the LNP subjected the nation to such disharmony, it is kind of the opposite of what a good government should be doing. That is bringing harmony to a nation.
11:03am 04/10/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9507 posts
For people who aren't gay, there is no excuse *at all*, the fact they can work themselves up into an emotional state is evidence of their lack of commitment not the other way around.

I don't even know what you're trying to say here...what is this is supposed to mean? People get emotional with everything from a TV show to their footy team


I'm trying to imagine the thought process that went through his head when he typed that. "Yes, that looks like a legible sentence. Those words work together. Okay. I'll post that." Because it sure as f*** doesn't mean s***.
12:08pm 04/10/17 Permalink
Zapo
Brisbane, Queensland
3408 posts
Come on now Zapo. If you're trying to link the no campaign to nazis you lose.


When did I do that? I've referenced a whole heap of things which people on the no campaign side HAVE done, obviously the worst of the worst.

What have you referenced the YES group has done? Complained and stolen signs? Tried (unsuccessfully to get someone fired).

ALso, my partner had a team lunch today in Sydney and someone from the NO side had hte whole "What's next, pedophilia" argument. This is at a workplace. I think your argument that people are being silenced on the No side is rubbish. Clearly they're not.

Anyway, to be honest we keep going around in circles. I've said what I wanted to say. I think the majority on this forum seem to be voting yes (YAY!) and I don't really want to argue for the sake of arguing.

last edited by Zapo at 15:08:57 04/Oct/17
03:03pm 04/10/17 Permalink
fpot
Gold Coast, Queensland
26060 posts
Pete is a beep boop robot man whose internal logic servos critically analyze every facet of an argument allowing him to be the calmest entity in the room on every internet argument. He mocks human emotion and would laugh if he could at the pathetic displays of human weakness on display here.

Except when someone says Trump isn't the greatest thing ever, or makes the slightest critique against capitalism, or suggests that nazis feeling empowered enough to publically march is not a good thing. Then he gets really f*****g angry and starts flailing around all misty eyed with rage. I wonder why that is?
04:27pm 04/10/17 Permalink
PornoPete
Melbourne, Victoria
2799 posts
when did I do that? I've referenced a whole heap of things which people on the no campaign side HAVE done, obviously the worst of the worst.


Why right here

A neo-nazi group posted flyers that labelled gay people pedophiles; using false data that has been championed by people in the No campaign.

It's time for the NO campaign to stop pretending that their campaign isn't generating violence. If you know people who haven't voted yet, ask them to #VoteYES or this violent behaviour will be normalised after the postal survey.


I went and looked at the link, and there is no connection between the no campaign and that event at all. That is a straight fabrication, and you posted it uncritically therefore I assume you agree.

I think your argument that people are being silenced on the No side is rubbish.

That's not my argument, and you will not find it anywhere in my posts.
But I'm happy to let it go if you are.


Because it sure as f*** doesn't mean s***.

I'm sure raven, if you try hard. Really Really hard. Like by reading the post the passage is responding to you'll be able to cobble the meaning together.

Oh look fpot "ignoring" me. Brave brave brave sir fpot. Can't argue so has to use ad hominem. and only after he smells a pile on. What a sad little man you are.
06:41pm 04/10/17 Permalink
ravn0s
Brisbane, Queensland
19146 posts
Same-sex marriage opponents have launched a phone application giving campaigners "turn by turn" directions to undecided voters' homes, in what it describes as an unprecedented move in Australian political campaigning.

The app was developed by the American company Political Social Media LLC, trading as uCampaign, which built apps for Donald Trump's presidential campaign, Brexit's "Vote Leave" and the powerful National Rifle Association.


source
01:46pm 05/10/17 Permalink
Raven
Melbourne, Victoria
9508 posts
Wow these people really are sacks of s***, releasing BS like that under the guise of "convincing" people to vote one way or another. Yeah, because that's how it'll be used - especially by these people.

Hope this gets stamped out incredibly quickly.
02:14pm 05/10/17 Permalink
system
Internet
--
02:14pm 05/10/17 Permalink
AusGamers Forums
Show: per page
1
Post a Reply
You must be logged in to post a reply.