Same sex marriage debate...

[jirskyr]

The guy has said it had nothing to do with being a Yes voter, he's just always hated him.

That's why he was wearing a SSM vote Yes badge. Purely coincidental, it was a crime of opportunity. :unamused:

Note the obscene haste Brandis came out to deny he is a SSM supporter.

Who cares whether or not he was a yes supporter? Even if he headbutted Abbott expressly because of this vote and no other reason (because of course Abbott has never given anyone reason to want to headbutt him, ever) then it's still just one DH breaking the law. It's like saying Islamic extremists speak on behalf of Muslims, or are representative of Muslims.

What this incident really shows is that people who break the law are dealt with accordingly. And very few people think what he did was acceptable.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

I guess once the yes vote gets up and equality is achieved, the "Gay Mardo Gras" can become just "The Mardi Gras", and in the spirit of equality Hetero's can join in to celebrate their straightness.
I also think the LGBTIQ term is a little outdated. Perhaps it can be changed to something that we can more easily remember. For a start the "B" is out. I think it makes sense that "B" be replaced with "O" for others. That can include "Bi's", "Gender Neutrals" and any other term thought up in the future. The "L" should be at the start in honour of the Dykes on Bikes leading the way at the Mardi Gras for so long. "H" for Hetero should be included for the sake of equality. I favour it being updated to;
LQ-GTHO (phase 2)
Easy to remember, with a little Aussie flavour.

Out of curiosity, would you have any interest in marching in a straight parade?

 

[Spook]

I guess once the yes vote gets up and equality is achieved, the "Gay Mardo Gras" can become just "The Mardi Gras", and in the spirit of equality Hetero's can join in to celebrate their straightness.
I also think the LGBTIQ term is a little outdated. Perhaps it can be changed to something that we can more easily remember. For a start the "B" is out. I think it makes sense that "B" be replaced with "O" for others. That can include "Bi's", "Gender Neutrals" and any other term thought up in the future. The "L" should be at the start in honour of the Dykes on Bikes leading the way at the Mardi Gras for so long. "H" for Hetero should be included for the sake of equality. I favour it being updated to;
LQ-GTHO (phase 2)
Easy to remember, with a little Aussie flavour.

Out of curiosity, would you have any interest in marching in a straight parade?

It wouldn't be a straight or gay parade. It would be a parade celebrating equality and diversity. It doesn't matter who is interested in marching, it is just everybody's human right for inclusion if they wish.

 

[Pawsandclaws]

I guess once the yes vote gets up and equality is achieved, the "Gay Mardo Gras" can become just "The Mardi Gras", and in the spirit of equality Hetero's can join in to celebrate their straightness.
I also think the LGBTIQ term is a little outdated. Perhaps it can be changed to something that we can more easily remember. For a start the "B" is out. I think it makes sense that "B" be replaced with "O" for others. That can include "Bi's", "Gender Neutrals" and any other term thought up in the future. The "L" should be at the start in honour of the Dykes on Bikes leading the way at the Mardi Gras for so long. "H" for Hetero should be included for the sake of equality. I favour it being updated to;
LQ-GTHO (phase 2)
Easy to remember, with a little Aussie flavour.

Out of curiosity, would you have any interest in marching in a straight parade?

It wouldn't be a straight or gay parade. It would be a parade celebrating equality and diversity. It doesn't matter who is interested in marching, it is just everybody's human right for inclusion if they wish.

But if that occurred, the LGBTIQ community wouldn't be able to celebrate how different they are to the rest of us.

 

[Pawsandclaws]

The guy has said it had nothing to do with being a Yes voter, he's just always hated him.

That's why he was wearing a SSM vote Yes badge. Purely coincidental, it was a crime of opportunity. :unamused:

Note the obscene haste Brandis came out to deny he is a SSM supporter.

Who cares whether or not he was a yes supporter? Even if he headbutted Abbott expressly because of this vote and no other reason (because of course Abbott has never given anyone reason to want to headbutt him, ever) then it's still just one DH breaking the law. It's like saying Islamic extremists speak on behalf of Muslims, or are representative of Muslims.

What this incident really shows is that people who break the law are dealt with accordingly. And very few people think what he did was acceptable.

Assaulting a former PM is reprehensible and demands a good dose of penal servitude. Assaulting a former PM who is in many ways the face of the No campaign during the survey over the definition of marriage highlights high level of intolerance and intimidation.

 

[Yossarian]

I guess once the yes vote gets up and equality is achieved, the "Gay Mardo Gras" can become just "The Mardi Gras", and in the spirit of equality Hetero's can join in to celebrate their straightness.
I also think the LGBTIQ term is a little outdated. Perhaps it can be changed to something that we can more easily remember. For a start the "B" is out. I think it makes sense that "B" be replaced with "O" for others. That can include "Bi's", "Gender Neutrals" and any other term thought up in the future. The "L" should be at the start in honour of the Dykes on Bikes leading the way at the Mardi Gras for so long. "H" for Hetero should be included for the sake of equality. I favour it being updated to;
LQ-GTHO (phase 2)
Easy to remember, with a little Aussie flavour.

Out of curiosity, would you have any interest in marching in a straight parade?

It wouldn't be a straight or gay parade. It would be a parade celebrating equality and diversity. It doesn't matter who is interested in marching, it is just everybody's human right for inclusion if they wish.

But if that occurred, the LGBTIQ community wouldn't be able to celebrate how different they are to the rest of us.

Let's cancel St Patrick's day too.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

I guess once the yes vote gets up and equality is achieved, the "Gay Mardo Gras" can become just "The Mardi Gras", and in the spirit of equality Hetero's can join in to celebrate their straightness.
I also think the LGBTIQ term is a little outdated. Perhaps it can be changed to something that we can more easily remember. For a start the "B" is out. I think it makes sense that "B" be replaced with "O" for others. That can include "Bi's", "Gender Neutrals" and any other term thought up in the future. The "L" should be at the start in honour of the Dykes on Bikes leading the way at the Mardi Gras for so long. "H" for Hetero should be included for the sake of equality. I favour it being updated to;
LQ-GTHO (phase 2)
Easy to remember, with a little Aussie flavour.

Out of curiosity, would you have any interest in marching in a straight parade?

It wouldn't be a straight or gay parade. It would be a parade celebrating equality and diversity. It doesn't matter who is interested in marching, it is just everybody's human right for inclusion if they wish.

So there is nothing stopping straight people from having their own parade, celebrating their straightness if that is what they want to do.

 

[earl]

Out of curiosity, would you have any interest in marching in a straight parade?

It wouldn't be a straight or gay parade. It would be a parade celebrating equality and diversity. It doesn't matter who is interested in marching, it is just everybody's human right for inclusion if they wish.

But if that occurred, the LGBTIQ community wouldn't be able to celebrate how different they are to the rest of us.

Let's cancel St Patrick's day too.

We have too. We also have to cancel Christmas day etc. We cannot have people expressing any form of being different to anyone else.

 

[Byron_Bay_Fan]

The guy has said it had nothing to do with being a Yes voter, he's just always hated him.

That's why he was wearing a SSM vote Yes badge. Purely coincidental, it was a crime of opportunity. :unamused:

Note the obscene haste Brandis came out to deny he is a SSM supporter.

Who cares whether or not he was a yes supporter? Even if he headbutted Abbott expressly because of this vote and no other reason (because of course Abbott has never given anyone reason to want to headbutt him, ever) then it's still just one DH breaking the law. It's like saying Islamic extremists speak on behalf of Muslims, or are representative of Muslims.

What this incident really shows is that people who break the law are dealt with accordingly. And very few people think what he did was acceptable.

Assaulting a former PM is reprehensible and demands a good dose of penal servitude. Assaulting a former PM who is in many ways the face of the No campaign during the survey over the definition of marriage highlights high level of intolerance and intimidation.

But when those assassins attempted to take out Adolf we were cheering them on. Is it wrong to take out gay haters when they were wiping out the lesbian and gay communities like Adolf was? Or is it only okay to wipe them out if they pick on straight communities?

 

[Pawsandclaws]

That's why he was wearing a SSM vote Yes badge. Purely coincidental, it was a crime of opportunity. :unamused:

Note the obscene haste Brandis came out to deny he is a SSM supporter.

Who cares whether or not he was a yes supporter? Even if he headbutted Abbott expressly because of this vote and no other reason (because of course Abbott has never given anyone reason to want to headbutt him, ever) then it's still just one DH breaking the law. It's like saying Islamic extremists speak on behalf of Muslims, or are representative of Muslims.

What this incident really shows is that people who break the law are dealt with accordingly. And very few people think what he did was acceptable.

Assaulting a former PM is reprehensible and demands a good dose of penal servitude. Assaulting a former PM who is in many ways the face of the No campaign during the survey over the definition of marriage highlights high level of intolerance and intimidation.

But when those assassins attempted to take out Adolf we were cheering them on. Is it wrong to take out gay haters when they were wiping out the lesbian and gay communities like Adolf was? Or is it only okay to wipe them out if they pick on straight communities?

What greater message to send to the community that even if you are a former PM, you will be targeted if you do not share our view.

 

[Pawsandclaws]

It wouldn't be a straight or gay parade. It would be a parade celebrating equality and diversity. It doesn't matter who is interested in marching, it is just everybody's human right for inclusion if they wish.

But if that occurred, the LGBTIQ community wouldn't be able to celebrate how different they are to the rest of us.

Let's cancel St Patrick's day too.

We have too. We also have to cancel Christmas day etc. We cannot have people expressing any form of being different to anyone else.

That's right, we can pick and choose what we want, depending on our agenda. Can't wait for Special Persons' Day to replace Father's Day. A bit of social engineering thought up over a double decafe skim milk late with a little twist of lemon in it in a trendy Inner West café in Sydney.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

Again, this thread is about SSM isn't it? Not about about Christmas or Fathers Day being renamed, or whether procreation is possible. Muddying the waters alright.

 

[Pawsandclaws]

Again, this thread is about SSM isn't it? Not about about Christmas or Fathers Day being renamed, or whether procreation is possible. Muddying the waters alright.

Oh, I forgot, Adolf Hitler is against the redefinition of marriage. 😱pen_mouth:

 

[Tim Sheens]

Just googled to confirm.

The other difference is the plebiscite is essentially a non-binding "vote" on an issue, run by the AEC. Not the ABS and Auspost.

Now descended from a survey to the point of an absolute shambles and even more so than that of the last census.

It is now worse than the last time I/we were asked a question, being the always doomed to fail flawed option republic one, that should have also been a simple yes/no.

 

[hammertime]

A man in Melbourne has been jailed for marrying a 14 year old girl. Distirbing that that type of marriage receives less condemnation than 2 consenting adults.

You're not serious are you? How many people would accept the above? Pretty darn small % of the population. It's illegal and most people on the street would condemn it, and if they don't, lock the sickos up!

Are you talking level of media coverage or something?

Not saying anyone condone's it, but it's disturbing that the no campaign make such a big deal about SSM, when there are examples like this that are an out and out abuse on the term "marriage".

It's probably because it's illegal so I'm not sure what fuss needs to be made about it. It's sick and it needs to be stopped, but there are laws to stop it. And the child abuse is the central issue to me in that, not the illegal marriage.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

A man in Melbourne has been jailed for marrying a 14 year old girl. Distirbing that that type of marriage receives less condemnation than 2 consenting adults.

You're not serious are you? How many people would accept the above? Pretty darn small % of the population. It's illegal and most people on the street would condemn it, and if they don't, lock the sickos up!

Are you talking level of media coverage or something?

Not saying anyone condone's it, but it's disturbing that the no campaign make such a big deal about SSM, when there are examples like this that are an out and out abuse on the term "marriage".

It's probably because it's illegal so I'm not sure what fuss needs to be made about it. **It's sick and it needs to be stopped**, but there are laws to stop it. And the child abuse is the central issue to me in that, not the illegal marriage.

And there are people who will use these exact words about SSM.

 

[Pawsandclaws]

You're not serious are you? How many people would accept the above? Pretty darn small % of the population. It's illegal and most people on the street would condemn it, and if they don't, lock the sickos up!

Are you talking level of media coverage or something?

Not saying anyone condone's it, but it's disturbing that the no campaign make such a big deal about SSM, when there are examples like this that are an out and out abuse on the term "marriage".

It's probably because it's illegal so I'm not sure what fuss needs to be made about it. **It's sick and it needs to be stopped**, but there are laws to stop it. And the child abuse is the central issue to me in that, not the illegal marriage.

And there are people who will use these exact words about SSM.

We have our AG so quick to believe an alleged criminal over a former PM, both of the same political party. It just demonstrates how polarising this issue has become.

 

[Go_You_Good_Things]

All those gays who were bashed and pushed over cliffs in the 1970s and 1980s around Sydney I am sure would have much preferred just a bleeding lip instead. It is Abbott's attitude that assists in discrimination that results in more extreme reactions like those murders. That is also why the ripple effect is also necessary after change of law so that all discrimination is eliminated at face to face level.

You think in interesting ways, byron.
While I don't particularly condone pushing gays off cliffs, as you say . . . . you can't make today pay for the sins of 1920, 1940, or 1960\. My parents were called wogs and daigo's . . . possibly by your parents . . . but that was in the past. Things are more accepting today and my folks don't go out to change the world for something that happened 50 yrs ago. But maybe they have more common sense than you and your homo mates.
To hear you say that you await the ripple effect if this vote gets passed is exactly the reason so many normal folks are against it. Your idea of fairness is to punish today for the sins of 200 yrs ago. You don't want 50/50, because you don't want fair . . . you only proclaim fair so all your leftie mates agree . . . you want 90/10\. Then you wonder why the cliffs.
You infer that Abbot brought the assault upon himself because of his views. So your homo mate bashed him. Yet you then wring your hands about violence towards homo's. That seems homosexual fair.
Tell me, how is the left dealing with Islam publicly declaring a "unilaterally instructed" NO vote ?

 

[earl]

The thing is GYGT that at the moment we have institutionalised racism in the form or not allowing SSM. I have a couple of homo mates at work and they seem like good people to me.

One guy is young and campaigning on this issue. I can't imagine the shit that he has had to put up with in his life. Why anyone would state that he can't get married if he chooses too is beyond me.

I love how you use the word homo as well. it just shows that you are a bigot.

I also don't get the left comment. I'm what would be considered a liberal in that I believe in small government and allowing people to choose how they want to live their life. The right at this point are nothing like that. They want to control how others live their life and SSM is a classic example of this.

 

[Yossarian]

All those gays who were bashed and pushed over cliffs in the 1970s and 1980s around Sydney I am sure would have much preferred just a bleeding lip instead. It is Abbott's attitude that assists in discrimination that results in more extreme reactions like those murders. That is also why the ripple effect is also necessary after change of law so that all discrimination is eliminated at face to face level.

So your homo mate bashed him. Yet you then wring your hands about violence towards homo's. That seems homosexual fair.

Well you've well and truly exposed yourself as a homophobic bigot. Probably the most shameful post in this whole thread. You're a disgrace.