Page 1 of 1

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sat 02 Dec, 2017 8:08 am
by goldcoast tiger
The thing that gets up my nose about the aftermath of the vote was all the squealing about what the no voters want to happen now. All the stuff about who can still discriminate against a group
Of people who have a different life than them.
You lost, just as happens in ANY election, or any open and fair vote,

Are we going to make allowances for whichever side loses the next election.
If Turnbull is returned, are we then going to fiddle with the result to pacify the losing voters.
Maybe we can get the liberal party to let Chris Pyne be PM on every third week of the term.
That would suit some people (probably not many, I hope) .
You Can’t have it both ways . You shouldn’t get to decide who is a second class person and who isn’t . We either have a no discrimination law or we don’t.
I can already hear the answer to that one.
“Gee that discriminates against the Bakers and florists who have a voice in the sky telling them
thet shouldn’t sell to ,or work for gay customer”.

Will Protestant bakers next want to not sell to Catholic customers , that would be as stupid as discriminating against The Gay community.

Face facts, theNo voters were soundly beaten, Pass the law and accept the majority decision,

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sat 02 Dec, 2017 8:20 am
by Byron Bay Fan
We have another Black Wednesday - the day of the Double Uppercut. Could also be another Ash Wednesday when the Church's influence turned to ashes. They may respond with gated communities.

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sat 02 Dec, 2017 8:25 am
by GNR4LIFE
goldcoast tiger wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 8:08 am
The thing that gets up my nose about the aftermath of the vote was all the squealing about what the no voters want to happen now. All the stuff about who can still discriminate against a group
Of people who have a different life than them.
You lost, just as happens in ANY election, or any open and fair vote,

Are we going to make allowances for whichever side loses the next election.
If Turnbull is returned, are we then going to fiddle with the result to pacify the losing voters.
Maybe we can get the liberal party to let Chris Pyne be PM on every third week of the term.
That would suit some people (probably not many, I hope) .
You Can’t have it both ways . You shouldn’t get to decide who is a second class person and who isn’t . We either have a no discrimination law or we don’t.
I can already hear the answer to that one.
“Gee that discriminates against the Bakers and florists who have a voice in the sky telling them
thet shouldn’t sell to ,or work for gay customer”.

Will Protestant bakers next want to not sell to Catholic customers , that would be as stupid as discriminating against The Gay community.

Face facts, theNo voters were soundly beaten, Pass the law and accept the majority decision,
I saw an interview with the leader of one of the Libreal Party groups who were pushing the No vote, the day the vote was announced and she said "I think the big thing here is 40% of the Australian public voted no". And I was like "and?" That means 60% voted yes. Majority rules.

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sat 02 Dec, 2017 10:03 am
by Byron Bay Fan
GNR4LIFE wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 8:25 am
goldcoast tiger wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 8:08 am
The thing that gets up my nose about the aftermath of the vote was all the squealing about what the no voters want to happen now. All the stuff about who can still discriminate against a group
Of people who have a different life than them.
You lost, just as happens in ANY election, or any open and fair vote,

Are we going to make allowances for whichever side loses the next election.
If Turnbull is returned, are we then going to fiddle with the result to pacify the losing voters.
Maybe we can get the liberal party to let Chris Pyne be PM on every third week of the term.
That would suit some people (probably not many, I hope) .
You Can’t have it both ways . You shouldn’t get to decide who is a second class person and who isn’t . We either have a no discrimination law or we don’t.
I can already hear the answer to that one.
“Gee that discriminates against the Bakers and florists who have a voice in the sky telling them
thet shouldn’t sell to ,or work for gay customer”.

Will Protestant bakers next want to not sell to Catholic customers , that would be as stupid as discriminating against The Gay community.

Face facts, theNo voters were soundly beaten, Pass the law and accept the majority decision,
I saw an interview with the leader of one of the Libreal Party groups who were pushing the No vote, the day the vote was announced and she said "I think the big thing here is 40% of the Australian public voted no". And I was like "and?" That means 60% voted yes. Majority rules.
Of course that 40% will also have gays amongst their children to they either alienate their children or eventually give in and go with the flow for sake of family love. I have a gay first cousin once removed who was in a relationship for about 50 years and no one ever mentioned him in a derogatory manner or treated differently at all.

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sat 02 Dec, 2017 10:36 am
by magpiecol
goldcoast tiger wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 8:08 am
The thing that gets up my nose about the aftermath of the vote was all the squealing about what the no voters want to happen now. All the stuff about who can still discriminate against a group
Of people who have a different life than them.
You lost, just as happens in ANY election, or any open and fair vote,

Are we going to make allowances for whichever side loses the next election.
If Turnbull is returned, are we then going to fiddle with the result to pacify the losing voters.
Maybe we can get the liberal party to let Chris Pyne be PM on every third week of the term.
That would suit some people (probably not many, I hope) .
You Can’t have it both ways . You shouldn’t get to decide who is a second class person and who isn’t . We either have a no discrimination law or we don’t.
I can already hear the answer to that one.
“Gee that discriminates against the Bakers and florists who have a voice in the sky telling them
thet shouldn’t sell to ,or work for gay customer”.

Will Protestant bakers next want to not sell to Catholic customers , that would be as stupid as discriminating against The Gay community.

Face facts, theNo voters were soundly beaten, Pass the law and accept the majority decision,
The only question that was asked of me, was if same sex people could get married. The vote was "yes".

Fair enough.

I never noticed a question about people who do not believe in this concept, can be penalised for not supplying goods or services against their beliefs.

It would be interesting if they had another vote on this question. (not by the dopes in Parliament).

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sat 02 Dec, 2017 12:57 pm
by goldcoast tiger
I don’t believe in the concept of the LNP at the moment, but if they win. I’ve just got to cop it
We dont need ,another vote,
We either have antidiscrimination laws or we don’t,
They can’t make different laws for every group of people that dislike a different group,

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sat 02 Dec, 2017 1:18 pm
by Byron Bay Fan
goldcoast tiger wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 12:57 pm
I don’t believe in the concept of the LNP at the moment, but if they win. I’ve just got to cop it
We dont need ,another vote,
We either have antidiscrimination laws or we don’t,
They can’t make different laws for every group of people that dislike a different group,
I don't go along with discrimination based on religion because many people change their religions and even lose their religion - then they want to conveniently forget the mischief they earlier caused.

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sat 02 Dec, 2017 2:09 pm
by goldcoast tiger
Byron Bay Fan wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 1:18 pm
goldcoast tiger wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 12:57 pm
I don’t believe in the concept of the LNP at the moment, but if they win. I’ve just got to cop it
We dont need ,another vote,
We either have antidiscrimination laws or we don’t,
They can’t make different laws for every group of people that dislike a different group,
I don't go along with discrimination based on religion because many people change their religions and even lose their religion - then they want to conveniently forget the mischief they earlier caused.
True

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sat 02 Dec, 2017 3:33 pm
by Earl
magpiecol wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 10:36 am
I never noticed a question about people who do not believe in this concept, can be penalised for not supplying goods or services against their beliefs.

It would be interesting if they had another vote on this question. (not by the dopes in Parliament).
There definitely shouldn't be a vote on this and people who don't supply goods or services for gay people should be punished. Discrimination is unacceptable in our society.

Those that can't accept that should go and live in Saudi Arabia or something like that because they aren't welcome here.

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sat 02 Dec, 2017 4:26 pm
by Snake
Earl wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 3:33 pm
magpiecol wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 10:36 am
I never noticed a question about people who do not believe in this concept, can be penalised for not supplying goods or services against their beliefs.

It would be interesting if they had another vote on this question. (not by the dopes in Parliament).
There definitely shouldn't be a vote on this and people who don't supply goods or services for gay people should be punished. Discrimination is unacceptable in our society.

Those that can't accept that should go and live in Saudi Arabia or something like that because they aren't welcome here.

Yes free speech and freedom of expression seems to be alive and well in our country well that is if you do not have another opinion looks like Saudi Arabia it is !

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sat 02 Dec, 2017 4:32 pm
by Earl
Snake wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 4:26 pm
Earl wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 3:33 pm
magpiecol wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 10:36 am
I never noticed a question about people who do not believe in this concept, can be penalised for not supplying goods or services against their beliefs.

It would be interesting if they had another vote on this question. (not by the dopes in Parliament).
There definitely shouldn't be a vote on this and people who don't supply goods or services for gay people should be punished. Discrimination is unacceptable in our society.

Those that can't accept that should go and live in Saudi Arabia or something like that because they aren't welcome here.

Yes free speech and freedom of expression seems to be alive and well in our country well that is if you do not have another opinion looks like Saudi Arabia it is !
You have free speech. You just can't discriminate against people because you are homophobic. Seems fair enough to me. It's just the same as discriminating against women or people who aren't white or who are tall or short or whatever. That crap shouldn't be allowed in a civilised society.

I wonder the type of people that try and control others. Imagine discriminating against someone because they are attracted to someone of the same sex. Crazy stuff !

If you went and lived in Saudi Arabia you might find out it's not as good as what you think it is but I'd love to see a bunch of racist morons move over there.

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sat 02 Dec, 2017 10:26 pm
by magpiecol
If someone does not want to supply services to some people then there are plenty of others that will. Why does the left insist on name calling of people who do not agree with their point of view. Crazy. Live and let live I say.

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sat 02 Dec, 2017 11:21 pm
by happy tiger
magpiecol wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 10:26 pm
If someone does not want to supply services to some people then there are plenty of others that will. Why does the left insist on name calling of people who do not agree with their point of view. Crazy. Live and let live I say.
Well Col , you have surprised me :D

Never thought I'd be giving you a thumbs up

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sat 02 Dec, 2017 11:36 pm
by Byron Bay Fan
magpiecol wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 10:26 pm
If someone does not want to supply services to some people then there are plenty of others that will. Why does the left insist on name calling of people who do not agree with their point of view. Crazy. Live and let live I say.
In small country towns there could be only one supplier and it is still rude to refuse. I hope there are boycotts of discriminating shops. When it was illegal for Aborigines to have grog they would still get served at the back door.

If a gay couple get a friend to purchase cakes on their behalf from a boycotting shop is this unfair to the shopkeepers?

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sun 03 Dec, 2017 2:02 am
by Byron Bay Fan
Why can't service stations also refuse to serve SSM people - if that means that half way across the Nullabor gays die in the desert for lack of juice then bad luck. Stuff Presilla!

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sun 03 Dec, 2017 7:18 am
by goldcoast tiger
Snake wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 4:26 pm
Earl wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 3:33 pm
magpiecol wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 10:36 am
I never noticed a question about people who do not believe in this concept, can be penalised for not supplying goods or services against their beliefs.

It would be interesting if they had another vote on this question. (not by the dopes in Parliament).
There definitely shouldn't be a vote on this and people who don't supply goods or services for gay people should be punished. Discrimination is unacceptable in our society.

Those that can't accept that should go and live in Saudi Arabia or something like that because they aren't welcome here.

Yes free speech and freedom of expression seems to be alive and well in our country well that is if you do not have another opinion looks like Saudi Arabia it is !
I wouldn’t go that far,
But it was a very clear result , and they lost ,
So accept that ,as there is anti discrimination laws in the country that affect us all, so don’t discriminate.
Are these shopkeepers princesses going to knock back the money that Gays spend in their shops. Not bloody likely!!
So treat them as you would anyone else, and stop all the childish whining
Even though there should never have been a survey/ plebiscite whatever( as we already knew what the result would be), it’s over, the vast majority said yes.
Suck it up and get on with your lives,

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sun 03 Dec, 2017 7:19 am
by hammertime
magpiecol wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 10:26 pm
If someone does not want to supply services to some people then there are plenty of others that will. Why does the left insist on name calling of people who do not agree with their point of view. Crazy. Live and let live I say.
Well said mate. I only know two no voters. My grandparents. Who have been through a depression, fought for this country in a war and are the nicest souls you would
meet. Being in their 90s, they obviously don't like change.

People spewing hate towards people like my grandparents are the sick ones and really need to start shutting the hell up.

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Posted: Sun 03 Dec, 2017 8:05 am
by Pawsandclaws
magpiecol wrote:
Sat 02 Dec, 2017 10:26 pm
If someone does not want to supply services to some people then there are plenty of others that will. Why does the left insist on name calling of people who do not agree with their point of view. Crazy. Live and let live I say.
It's not a leftie thing, If you note there were significant votes of no ranging from sixty to eighty percent in many Labor electorates. Bowen, Burke and co should all be voting no in accordance with the wishes of the electorate in which they represent. My electorate almost had a split vote and Morrison will of course be voting no. I voted no as a long standing labor voter as did most of my "leftie" friends.