Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Talk about everything but gaming in here!

Moderators: pilonv1, Juzbuffa

Post Reply
User avatar
Cletus
Hates Everyone Equally
Hates Everyone Equally
Posts: 15563
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 12:56 am
Location: Aboard the HMAS Todd Margaret
Contact:

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by Cletus »

No it isn't. Women's suffrage was taken care of by the end of the 1800's. You know how? They had people sign petitions. A lot of men signed those petitions. Imagine if they tried the "men can't be trusted, it'll cause hordes of women suicide" angle. It's not really any different. Rights are often granted by the majority. I know and I've heard it several times that a gay person shouldn't have to get the permission from the rest of the population to gain equal rights but that was the offer on the table. Gone now though.
User avatar
GeneraL CyberFunK
Wants it in 8 Directions
Posts: 2896
Joined: 16 Dec 2006 03:28 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by GeneraL CyberFunK »

Cletus wrote:No it isn't. Women's suffrage was taken care of by the end of the 1800's. You know how? They had people sign petitions. A lot of men signed those petitions. Imagine if they tried the "men can't be trusted, it'll cause hordes of women suicide" angle. It's not really any different. Rights are often granted by the majority. I know and I've heard it several times that a gay person shouldn't have to get the permission from the rest of the population to gain equal rights but that was the offer on the table. Gone now though.
The date in history is actually irrelevant. But to be a stickler for facts, true suffrage didn't completely end in Australia until 1923 when the last state allowed women to stand for parliament. Took almost 30 years in our country from the first state (SA) to allow the vote to 1923 (VIC) to allow women to stand for parliament. Let's then also consider the years prior to that where women had to push for the rights.

The angle of suicide due to untrustworthy men is also irrelevant given that women weren't actually considered as depraved sexual miscreants from just being women who were considered evil horrible people and ultimately shamed into hiding. How on earth can you have an informed opinion on whether or not gay people have done enough in the past given that for many of us just being gay and walking down a street had mortal risk. It was and still is a different kind of prejudice and let's be clear - mental health of women or gay people was not considered as an important reason back then - We are talking about a time where lobotomies were considered cutting edge and plausible solutions to mental health.
We've signed petitions, had marches and had opinion polls that prove that the majority is with us.
It seems that you miss the point that equal rights shouldn't BE an offer.

It's not gone and it won't go away. We're deemed a secular nation and yet being governed by the religious views of a now minority. This will continue to get chipped away.. the chunks are getting bigger now.
User avatar
Cletus
Hates Everyone Equally
Hates Everyone Equally
Posts: 15563
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 12:56 am
Location: Aboard the HMAS Todd Margaret
Contact:

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by Cletus »

I haven't missed the point. I missed the point of rejecting any legitimate opportunity for change...especially if you're right about the opinion polls and marches (I know you are). I don't disagree that it was unnecessary. Is the ideal solution for ministers to gauge the opinion of their electorate and vote accordingly? Vote solely on their conscience? Vote according to their personal beliefs? Someone will "decide" to "grant" you equal rights, no matter how you look at it. The thing is for those really against it, a positive result (for LGBTQ) would really legitimise change for a lot of people against it. The people decided, anyone against lost by a huge margin (hypothetical of course). Knowing you live in a society that 48 of the 50 people around you are all in favour of change would make it difficult for thse harbouring hatred to express that in a damaging way or publicly..etc. I haven't missed the point at all. I saw the government acting on the will of the majority as a win, for you. You see it as grovelling to the majority. I suspect that if this does happen without a demonstrable public consensus, those against it will have even more excuses to be toxic, in opposition to the outcomes of a process you might deem as ideal. I know it's not gone. I'm saying this opportunity is gone. And it is gone. We have a conservative government right now. If the ALP get a run, maybe reform, maybe not. Your equality really depends on who they're pandering to while in government.

This is unfortunately about two conflicting minorities which is probably the point I had missed. It's not about "us". I probably should have maintained disinterest. I'm sure I've said in the past this shouldn't be election issue and I wouldn't be stirred to vote for or against a party using SSM reform as their platform. I know I've said that a long while back. It's not a policy, it's a decision made in parliament. Someone can check, I won't be though. Immigration may even cause more of "them vs "you" dynamic. I'm guessing that a lot of those who migrate here follow one religion or another, almost all against anything we're talking about. In my street, Sikh, Catholic, Hindu, Greek Orthodox, Muslim, theists, deists and myself an atheist of catholic background. You're a safe bet with the sikhs, hindu and athiest. The rest....

And while you think this was part of the process of chipping away, I see it more of an act of obstructing your own progress.
User avatar
GeneraL CyberFunK
Wants it in 8 Directions
Posts: 2896
Joined: 16 Dec 2006 03:28 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by GeneraL CyberFunK »

Cletus wrote:I haven't missed the point. I missed the point of rejecting any legitimate opportunity for change...especially if you're right about the opinion polls and marches (I know you are). I don't disagree that it was unnecessary. Is the ideal solution for ministers to gauge the opinion of their electorate and vote accordingly? Vote solely on their conscience? Vote according to their personal beliefs? Someone will "decide" to "grant" you equal rights, no matter how you look at it. The thing is for those really against it, a positive result (for LGBTQ) would really legitimise change for a lot of people against it. The people decided, anyone against lost by a huge margin (hypothetical of course). Knowing you live in a society that 48 of the 50 people around you are all in favour of change would make it difficult for thse harbouring hatred to express that in a damaging way or publicly..etc. I haven't missed the point at all. I saw the government acting on the will of the majority as a win, for you. You see it as grovelling to the majority. I suspect that if this does happen without a demonstrable public consensus, those against it will have even more excuses to be toxic, in opposition to the outcomes of a process you might deem as ideal. I know it's not gone. I'm saying this opportunity is gone. And it is gone. We have a conservative government right now. If the ALP get a run, maybe reform, maybe not. Your equality really depends on who they're pandering to while in government.

And while you think this was part of the process of chipping away, I see it more of an act of blocking up your own progress.
I seriously doubt that the LNP would go ahead with same sex marriage if the plebiscite showed in favour. If they were dead set about allowing it, they would have confirmed it to be binding. They've hedged their bets. If they were actually serious about legalising it, they would have allowed their MPs to confer with the people of their electorates and gauge opinion from that. But they won't.
Hence why the 160 million is a waste. It has actual personal risk to those being scrutinized and is very likely to yield no change in the law. The inefficiencies and the lack of respect to it all just taints the idea of the plebiscite even more. We have a PM who says he is in favour of it but hasn't got the balls to simply to put it to a much cheaper and effective free vote. This bullshit about a mandate is fucking ridiculous considering the number of backflips Abbott performed. Why can he backflip on all his NO CUTS pledges yet the LNP cannot amend a plebiscite to a much more cost effective and binding approach?

Opportunities come and go. You have to pick the one that is actually going to be best. This was not good or a respectful opportunity. It's like going for a job and being promised you will have a fair go of getting it but being publicly ridiculed and taunted for thinking you are qualified for the job by those who have nothing to do with it.
User avatar
Cletus
Hates Everyone Equally
Hates Everyone Equally
Posts: 15563
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 12:56 am
Location: Aboard the HMAS Todd Margaret
Contact:

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by Cletus »

sorry, I have added while you replied

I wonder though. Does SSM demand or expect law to force churches of any religion to marry gay couples? can they still legally discriminate? To be honest I never gave that much thought. But laws are funny things.
User avatar
GeneraL CyberFunK
Wants it in 8 Directions
Posts: 2896
Joined: 16 Dec 2006 03:28 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by GeneraL CyberFunK »

Cletus wrote:
This is unfortunately about two conflicting minorities which is probably the point I had missed. It's not about "us". I probably should have maintained disinterest. I'm sure I've said in the past this shouldn't be election issue and I wouldn't be stirred to vote for or against a party using SSM reform as their platform. I know I've said that a long while back. It's not a policy, it's a decision made in parliament. Someone can check, I won't be though. Immigration may even cause more of "them vs "you" dynamic. I'm guessing that a lot of those who migrate here follow one religion or another, almost all against anything we're talking about. In my street, Sikh, Catholic, Hindu, Greek Orthodox, Muslim, theists, deists and myself an atheist of catholic background. You're a safe bet with the sikhs, hindu and athiest. The rest....
You're right.. it is about two conflicting minorities.. the problem is that one minority just doesn't like the other for who they are not what they believe in. I have no issue with religion. I find it fascinating.. but I recognise the problems it has caused. To my knowledge.. wars have been usually about religion. Not sucking dick or scissoring.
The thing is though - Religion is on the wrong side (again) with this conflict. The majority of Australians regardless of religion are in support of SSM so the majority of Australians support a minority group and yet our Government is pandering to the religious right?
You'd be surprised how many migrants leave their country to come here to live a life with a more lax outlook towards their religion.
Froggy
BLD4LBE
BLD4LBE
Posts: 4996
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 10:54 am

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by Froggy »

GeneraL CyberFunK wrote:I seriously doubt that the LNP would go ahead with same sex marriage if the plebiscite showed in favour. If they were dead set about allowing it, they would have confirmed it to be binding. They've hedged their bets. If they were actually serious about legalising it, they would have allowed their MPs to confer with the people of their electorates and gauge opinion from that. But they won't.
Hence why the 160 million is a waste. It has actual personal risk to those being scrutinized and is very likely to yield no change in the law. The inefficiencies and the lack of respect to it all just taints the idea of the plebiscite even more. We have a PM who says he is in favour of it but hasn't got the balls to simply to put it to a much cheaper and effective free vote. This bullshit about a mandate is fucking ridiculous considering the number of backflips Abbott performed. Why can he backflip on all his NO CUTS pledges yet the LNP cannot amend a plebiscite to a much more cost effective and binding approach?

Opportunities come and go. You have to pick the one that is actually going to be best. This was not good or a respectful opportunity. It's like going for a job and being promised you will have a fair go of getting it but being publicly ridiculed and taunted for thinking you are qualified for the job by those who have nothing to do with it.
They would follow through on it, it wouldn't happen straight away as there'd be arguments over protections for churches etc who do not want to marry same sex couples based on their religious belief systems etc so the legislative change would come just not like the next day.

You know parliament voted it down the last time it went to a vote because as part of the legislation they had to poll their constituencies and got resounding no's in all but 4 so had to vote accordingly because shock horror they represent those people's wishes.

This opportunity would have been the best way to knock the whole debate on the head, cletus is right, you can't argue back when basically everyone you look at in the street voted for it, no one's going to listen. Labour by blocking mandates for two parliaments in a row is effectively trashed any hope it has of a coalition government voting for anything they take to an election thanks to their trashing of parliamentary norms, so there's no guarantee if they win the next election that they'd get it through the upper house without the coalition deciding to push them to ask the people.

This whole plebiscite debacle is basically the greens and labor stamping their feet and sooking because they want to be the ones with their names in the history books as responsible for it. If they really cared and they think it is that serious an issue that must be addressed now then you'd vote in the plebiscite and be done with it. $160million to the federal government is a rounding error, it's nothing to finally solve the fucking argument for good. It goes the same with the gay lobby, the thought of it being passed under the liberal party that they have spent so many years painting as pure evil is too hard to stomach for them then the opportunity they have been fighting decades for, if I were a gay person and this plebiscite was not going ahead and I was passionate about gay marriage I'd be livid with the LBQT lobby, Labor and the Greens. They could be all getting married in the 2nd half of next year but oh well
Vzzzbx, you lose again!
User avatar
GeneraL CyberFunK
Wants it in 8 Directions
Posts: 2896
Joined: 16 Dec 2006 03:28 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by GeneraL CyberFunK »

Froggy wrote:
They would follow through on it, it wouldn't happen straight away as there'd be arguments over protections for churches etc who do not want to marry same sex couples based on their religious belief systems etc so the legislative change would come just not like the next day.

You know parliament voted it down the last time it went to a vote because as part of the legislation they had to poll their constituencies and got resounding no's in all but 4 so had to vote accordingly because shock horror they represent those people's wishes.
If they intended on following through on it, they wouldn't be so agile and dance around confirming it beforehand. They have made a point of not confirming that they would allow it if the plebiscite came back in favour. Which makes it a potentially wasteful and needless event when they won't stand and say they will pass it if the public vote in favour of it.
Froggy wrote:This opportunity would have been the best way to knock the whole debate on the head, cletus is right, you can't argue back when basically everyone you look at in the street voted for it, no one's going to listen. Labour by blocking mandates for two parliaments in a row is effectively trashed any hope it has of a coalition government voting for anything they take to an election thanks to their trashing of parliamentary norms, so there's no guarantee if they win the next election that they'd get it through the upper house without the coalition deciding to push them to ask the people.
Yeah it could have been a good opportunity. At what cost though? A 160 Million to still have members of the LNP to ignore the vote and the potential for harm potentially mentally and physically to those in the LGBT community.

Froggy wrote:This whole plebiscite debacle is basically the greens and labor stamping their feet and sooking because they want to be the ones with their names in the history books as responsible for it. If they really cared and they think it is that serious an issue that must be addressed now then you'd vote in the plebiscite and be done with it. $160million to the federal government is a rounding error, it's nothing to finally solve the fucking argument for good. It goes the same with the gay lobby, the thought of it being passed under the liberal party that they have spent so many years painting as pure evil is too hard to stomach for them then the opportunity they have been fighting decades for, if I were a gay person and this plebiscite was not going ahead and I was passionate about gay marriage I'd be livid with the LBQT lobby, Labor and the Greens. They could be all getting married in the 2nd half of next year but oh well
That's bullshit. If that was the case, they wouldn't be pushing for the LNP to allow a free vote. The LNP have made mention previously that they intend on running "good government" and that they are dealing with the irresponsible spending from Labor. 160 Million is not a rounding error and you would find most people would prefer that money to be spent elsewhere. If this kind of process navigation was used in a business.. they would have gone broke by now. There is a clear and straight forward way to deal with this at a fraction of the cost and they continue to complicate it.

Secondly, the gay lobby may dislike the LNP (and they have a justified reason to do so given how so many right wingers have made very firm and disappointing comments about how they view gay people) but at the end of the day, the community doesn't give a shit who brings it in. So I would urge to quit talking for a community that you don't know enough about.
Froggy
BLD4LBE
BLD4LBE
Posts: 4996
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 10:54 am

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by Froggy »

Of course they were gonna go with the national result, it is no different to Brexit saying anything else is just an excuse to oppose it. Going on about a free vote was a way to try and politically wedge the libs on the pleberscite. All you are throwing up are excuses as to justify a position on not letting the libs go down in history with it. 160mil is less than a days interest in our national accounts so yes it is a rounding error, they waste more then that each year just administering letterheads etc.

You are living in fantasy land if you dont think the gay lobby and one Mr Adam bandt dont dream of themselves presenting the bill to parliament. If they really really wanted it a plebiscite and having gay marriage done next year is a no brainer especially with the years of polling we keep hearing about. This is up there with the greens voting against the carbon tax the first time from rudd because it didnt go far enough as a own goal. What is your position if Labor win the next election and want to vote on ssm but the libs have senate control and refuse to pass it except by plebiscite? Labors set the nrlew norm now to ignore election mandates so it is a good possibility of happening. I guarantee the greens and labor will be all for a plebiscite in that case.
Vzzzbx, you lose again!
User avatar
GeneraL CyberFunK
Wants it in 8 Directions
Posts: 2896
Joined: 16 Dec 2006 03:28 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by GeneraL CyberFunK »

Froggy wrote:Of course they were gonna go with the national result, it is no different to Brexit saying anything else is just an excuse to oppose it. Going on about a free vote was a way to try and politically wedge the libs on the pleberscite. All you are throwing up are excuses as to justify a position on not letting the libs go down in history with it. 160mil is less than a days interest in our national accounts so yes it is a rounding error, they waste more then that each year just administering letterheads etc.

You are living in fantasy land if you dont think the gay lobby and one Mr Adam bandt dont dream of themselves presenting the bill to parliament. If they really really wanted it a plebiscite and having gay marriage done next year is a no brainer especially with the years of polling we keep hearing about. This is up there with the greens voting against the carbon tax the first time from rudd because it didnt go far enough as a own goal. What is your position if Labor win the next election and want to vote on ssm but the libs have senate control and refuse to pass it except by plebiscite? Labors set the nrlew norm now to ignore election mandates so it is a good possibility of happening. I guarantee the greens and labor will be all for a plebiscite in that case.
You are so out of touch and again - talking for a demographic that you simply aren't a part of.
Like I said before.. The plebiscite and it's social fall out wouldn't affect me. Alas there are people out there that aren't as lucky or as mentally/emotionally/socially protected like I am. My concern is for the people whose health/lives could be compromised due to the vitriol that will spew forth and I'd be more interested in this 160 million to go hospitals or domestic violence funding. Your flippancy with such a huge amount of money and how much actual good it could do doesn't surprise me. If I was to be only thinking of myself, I'd be okay with the plebiscite. Having the majority of Australia agree with me? Sure - why not? The thing is and this is why your stance on this shows that you simply can't connect to the history behind all of this; I am aware that this is bigger than me.

Would you invite your father to your wedding if you knew he was going to disrupt it and call your wife a whore and openly insult her family for the rest of your married life? No. You wouldn't. It wouldn't be right and your conscious knows it shouldn't be like that.

If the govt scrapped the public funding for the plebiscite, I'd have been partially okay with it and from memory, I think Labor and The Greens would have considered it.

What is my position if Labor wins the next election and then a LNP controlled senate blocks it unless they do it by plebiscite? My position would be one of common fucking sense. I'd be pissed because that prospect would show how catty and destructive and wasteful the LNP can be. Labor are a pain in the arse about many things but for the LNP to do what you have proposed? It's the equivalent of burning someone's house down because they bought it and you didn't because your deposit wasn't enough.

It seems very clear that you've never actually lived your life feeling different because people made you feel different and having the uncomfortable truth that society still isn't 100% okay with who you are. If you had any idea, you'd see it differently.
Froggy
BLD4LBE
BLD4LBE
Posts: 4996
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 10:54 am

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by Froggy »

There is nothing new in this debate that hasn't been covered in the past 10+ years in the media, what have we had, 4 votes in parliament on it already and all failed. Here's the chance to end the issue once and for all and suddenly 160million becomes precious money we can't afford. In the scheme of overall federal government funding it is factually stuff all, it's not me being flippant. The amount of money they waste on just administrating stuff is huge compared to the cost of getting the entire Australian population to vote on and resolve this issue once and for all. It is nothing but an excuse and another reason to oppose the LNP legislating it in. If the government was to tip that 160million into national health, not one cent would make it to a patient it would all get eaten on the way.

The mental gymnastics you are throwing at this continue with the whole idea of the LNP doing exactly the same back to Labor as they have had done to themselves. If you wanted common sense to prevail you'd be shitty with Labour now for voting down the plebiscite (remember everyone was for it before the election until they realised the LNP would be the legislators) for political reasons. It's exactly the same scenario as now if labor get in and want a free vote and the libs say no the public votes then I have no doubt you'd be all up for a plebiscite then, to get it done, right? I have 100% certainty suddenly the greens and labour wouldn't have worries about suicidal gay people or anything like that, they'd be tripping over themselves to run the plebiscite.

So to me either Labor\greens:
Believe the polls that majority will vote yes (unlikely)
Want to be the ones to do it (likely)
do not actually care about solving the issue or the people it's effecting (obvious by their behaviour)
Vzzzbx, you lose again!
User avatar
GeneraL CyberFunK
Wants it in 8 Directions
Posts: 2896
Joined: 16 Dec 2006 03:28 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by GeneraL CyberFunK »

Froggy wrote:There is nothing new in this debate that hasn't been covered in the past 10+ years in the media, what have we had, 4 votes in parliament on it already and all failed. Here's the chance to end the issue once and for all and suddenly 160million becomes precious money we can't afford. In the scheme of overall federal government funding it is factually stuff all, it's not me being flippant. The amount of money they waste on just administrating stuff is huge compared to the cost of getting the entire Australian population to vote on and resolve this issue once and for all. It is nothing but an excuse and another reason to oppose the LNP legislating it in. If the government was to tip that 160million into national health, not one cent would make it to a patient it would all get eaten on the way.
You just don't get it. The plebiscite wouldn't resolve the issue once and for all. Why? Because it isn't binding. Make it binding and then that resolved it. Yes.. it has gone to the vote previously in parliament and yeah - it has been shot down.. by both the LNP and Labor. But political positions change and it really does seem as though the LNP are the last to consider that SSM is now accepted and/or supported by majority of Australians. Our Govt should have access to the best opinion polls yet they continue to ignore it?

160 million is not stuff all when you consider that there is a much more efficient and effective way to solve the problem. You may be okay with 160 million being stuff all and being dropped like with indifference like a 5c piece. Maybe me being a business owner I can't stand the idea of wasting money on shit where there is a much more cost effective and relevant solution.
Froggy wrote: The mental gymnastics you are throwing at this continue with the whole idea of the LNP doing exactly the same back to Labor as they have had done to themselves. If you wanted common sense to prevail you'd be shitty with Labour now for voting down the plebiscite (remember everyone was for it before the election until they realised the LNP would be the legislators) for political reasons. It's exactly the same scenario as now if labor get in and want a free vote and the libs say no the public votes then I have no doubt you'd be all up for a plebiscite then, to get it done, right? I have 100% certainty suddenly the greens and labour wouldn't have worries about suicidal gay people or anything like that, they'd be tripping over themselves to run the plebiscite.
When you play poker, do you work with the hand you have, or do you chuck a tanty that your opponents got a better hand than you? If Labor voted the plebiscite down solely because they wanted all the glory of legislating SSM - Yeah, I would be pissed. Like I said before though - the social nasty factor would not affect me. The idea of backing something that is unlikely to yield the result that Australians want pisses me off. The LNP won't allow SSM after a pro SSM plebiscite result. It would guarantee a definite defeat at the next election. The fact that the LNP allowed funding for the nasty right wingers to spill their poison (and let's be clear here - it's poison. Stupid, ignorant, fact denying poison) is another reason. I would have been much happier if neither side got to have funding for the campaign.
Froggy wrote: So to me either Labor\greens:
Believe the polls that majority will vote yes (unlikely)
Want to be the ones to do it (likely)
do not actually care about solving the issue or the people it's effecting (obvious by their behaviour)
And if that is the case (hey.. possible.. but I think more unlikely) the LNP are even worse in their approach and motives. They aren't interested in equality and hey.. numerous valid Australians continue to be considered less. But hey - it doesn't affect you so why would you be all that hurt/frustrated/enraged? You don't value or acknowledge the reasoning for blocking it. I can certainly see your position on it but you don't seem to even acknowledge or think some concern about the mental well-being of those in the proverbial firing line is something to worry about.
User avatar
unfnknblvbl
googlebomber
googlebomber
Posts: 9783
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 10:17 pm
XBL ID: unfunk
Steam ID: unfnknblvbl
Location: Just behind GameHED

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by unfnknblvbl »

Froggy wrote:Here's the chance to end the issue once and for all and suddenly 160million becomes precious money we can't afford. In the scheme of overall federal government funding it is factually stuff all, it's not me being flippant. The amount of money they waste on just administrating stuff is huge compared to the cost of getting the entire Australian population to vote on and resolve this issue once and for all. It is nothing but an excuse and another reason to oppose the LNP legislating it in. If the government was to tip that 160million into national health, not one cent would make it to a patient it would all get eaten on the way.
...and yet, if Labor had proposed a $160m non-binding plebiscite five years ago, you'd have decried it as a massive waste of public funds, typical of the Left...
The sky calls to us; if we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars
Froggy
BLD4LBE
BLD4LBE
Posts: 4996
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 10:54 am

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by Froggy »

No public votes cost money and if it solves this issue for good then no I wouldn't have been whinging. You are right though, they did and still do a great job of throwing away public money, if you want to get upset over spending check out the overblown costs of the new SA hospital, fuck me getting close to the cost of building another suburban one and a new city one for the same price.

You also can't have it cyberfunks way and have plebiscite\census and not equally fund both cases. Both sides have a legitimate argument and society was going to answer who was out of step with the public view but we won't have that anymore. It's laughable the fear factor of people going to kill themselves if we have this debate whilst voting down the solution and locking in at least 3 more years of said debate. If it's too scary for them to handle for a few months to February it's not going to be any better for another 3+ years is it?

Backflips, sideflips whatever, if you are a huge champion of gay marriage, you had it right there, you had the chance you've been screaming for and it's been taken away. It's up there with the fuck up of pushing for an R games classification and finally getting traction and then at the end point simply agreeing to shifting MA15+ and making it R and thus not solving the problem at all, still all the activists backslapped over it, a mission not accomplished. A plebiscite would have killed off naysayers in one hit. Just remember when Adam Bandt is proudly waving the legislation in say 4 years when it's passed it could have been done 3 years ago and solved a lot of heartache for a lot of people for him to get his moment.
Vzzzbx, you lose again!
User avatar
GeneraL CyberFunK
Wants it in 8 Directions
Posts: 2896
Joined: 16 Dec 2006 03:28 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by GeneraL CyberFunK »

Froggy wrote:No public votes cost money and if it solves this issue for good then no I wouldn't have been whinging. You are right though, they did and still do a great job of throwing away public money, if you want to get upset over spending check out the overblown costs of the new SA hospital, fuck me getting close to the cost of building another suburban one and a new city one for the same price.

You also can't have it cyberfunks way and have plebiscite\census and not equally fund both cases. Both sides have a legitimate argument and society was going to answer who was out of step with the public view but we won't have that anymore. It's laughable the fear factor of people going to kill themselves if we have this debate whilst voting down the solution and locking in at least 3 more years of said debate. If it's too scary for them to handle for a few months to February it's not going to be any better for another 3+ years is it?

Backflips, sideflips whatever, if you are a huge champion of gay marriage, you had it right there, you had the chance you've been screaming for and it's been taken away. It's up there with the fuck up of pushing for an R games classification and finally getting traction and then at the end point simply agreeing to shifting MA15+ and making it R and thus not solving the problem at all, still all the activists backslapped over it, a mission not accomplished. A plebiscite would have killed off naysayers in one hit. Just remember when Adam Bandt is proudly waving the legislation in say 4 years when it's passed it could have been done 3 years ago and solved a lot of heartache for a lot of people for him to get his moment.
I don't either case to receive funding. The tax payer shouldn't have to pay for the campaigns for pro/anti.
When you know someone who actually took their life for being bullied and ridiculed for being gay, maybe you could have a better understanding of why being so cautious is so important and that there are many LGBT people who are not happy with who they are due to the shit we've had to listen to over the decades. The difference is.. there aren't any ads on TV stating how gay marriage is child abuse and that we aren't equal and yada yada. There would have been if the plebiscite was to happen. Thus.. potentially compromising their mental health. It would increase the chances of it.. and I would prefer to not have anyone else die from this.

Froggy - you need to stop talking about this because you only see and believe your own side. I see what you are saying and yeah - if I was a self centred arsehole.. I would have said yeah do the plebiscite.. I get the proof that Australians want equality.. but I get the bitter sweetness that is that there could actually be a loss of life.. injury... oh and that very real possibility that it still doesn't go ahead given the proverbial gun that the Nationals and also the Right Wing nut jobs seem to have up to Turnbulls temple.

A plebiscite is not the best way of doing this.. and if this government is serious about good government, they would acknowledge this and find the better way of getting it done. It's party room semantics that is holding this up. The LNP know this and it is shit that our country has to be caught up in this sort of finnicky crap.
Froggy
BLD4LBE
BLD4LBE
Posts: 4996
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 10:54 am

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by Froggy »

GeneraL CyberFunK wrote:I don't either case to receive funding. The tax payer shouldn't have to pay for the campaigns for pro/anti.
When you know someone who actually took their life for being bullied and ridiculed for being gay, maybe you could have a better understanding of why being so cautious is so important and that there are many LGBT people who are not happy with who they are due to the shit we've had to listen to over the decades. The difference is.. there aren't any ads on TV stating how gay marriage is child abuse and that we aren't equal and yada yada. There would have been if the plebiscite was to happen. Thus.. potentially compromising their mental health. It would increase the chances of it.. and I would prefer to not have anyone else die from this.

Froggy - you need to stop talking about this because you only see and believe your own side. I see what you are saying and yeah - if I was a self centred arsehole.. I would have said yeah do the plebiscite.. I get the proof that Australians want equality.. but I get the bitter sweetness that is that there could actually be a loss of life.. injury... oh and that very real possibility that it still doesn't go ahead given the proverbial gun that the Nationals and also the Right Wing nut jobs seem to have up to Turnbulls temple.

A plebiscite is not the best way of doing this.. and if this government is serious about good government, they would acknowledge this and find the better way of getting it done. It's party room semantics that is holding this up. The LNP know this and it is shit that our country has to be caught up in this sort of finnicky crap.
This is entirely the point, those ads, those arguments are still there regardless and will be now for another 3+ years and will all air regardless of government funding if Labor\Greens win, the lobby groups now have years to save up even bigger chests. There's also advertising standards that you have to adhere to and again the same thing can be reversed and there'll be another section of Australia who don't want to hear pro-gay marriage advertising but will also have to live with it for a couple of months. At this stage, what is there left to argue about that hasn't already been covered?

You always have 50/50 funding in plebiscites or referendums, the government is impartial in them. The same argument can be thrown back at you about heavily religious people not wanting to live in a world where they feel that their beliefs are no longer valid. Of course I need to stop talking about this because I don't agree with you, how unsurprising an attitude. You wonder why they want to strip funding from half the debate because how dare other people hold opposing views, it's not like marriage might mean anything to anyone else in the population.

The only reason the party is caught up in this finnicky crap is because Labor like last election changed their minds on it once they lost and their resolution was to increase the thing they seemed most worried about and that was exposure to arguments from the no side. It makes no logical sense.
Vzzzbx, you lose again!
Madmya
Forum Faggot
Forum Faggot
Posts: 19118
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 01:51 am
XBL ID: Madmya
Steam ID: Madmya
Location: Brisbane

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by Madmya »

It's not just party room semantics behind this, Turnbull can't afford to upset religious voters which make up a significant amount of the LNP vote. Regardless, I think I've read the same post from everyone about 4 times now. We'll never know the outcome of some of these claims because there is no plebiscite. So now we can all look forward to rainbow avatars and B-grade celebrities like Dannii Minogue depriving us of marriage in Australia until SSM is legal.
Froggy
BLD4LBE
BLD4LBE
Posts: 4996
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 10:54 am

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by Froggy »

U r such a bigot Madmya
Vzzzbx, you lose again!
User avatar
GeneraL CyberFunK
Wants it in 8 Directions
Posts: 2896
Joined: 16 Dec 2006 03:28 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by GeneraL CyberFunK »

Froggy wrote:
This is entirely the point, those ads, those arguments are still there regardless and will be now for another 3+ years and will all air regardless of government funding if Labor\Greens win, the lobby groups now have years to save up even bigger chests. There's also advertising standards that you have to adhere to and again the same thing can be reversed and there'll be another section of Australia who don't want to hear pro-gay marriage advertising but will also have to live with it for a couple of months. At this stage, what is there left to argue about that hasn't already been covered?

You always have 50/50 funding in plebiscites or referendums, the government is impartial in them. The same argument can be thrown back at you about heavily religious people not wanting to live in a world where they feel that their beliefs are no longer valid. Of course I need to stop talking about this because I don't agree with you, how unsurprising an attitude. You wonder why they want to strip funding from half the debate because how dare other people hold opposing views, it's not like marriage might mean anything to anyone else in the population.

The only reason the party is caught up in this finnicky crap is because Labor like last election changed their minds on it once they lost and their resolution was to increase the thing they seemed most worried about and that was exposure to arguments from the no side. It makes no logical sense.
Err there are currently NO ads on major TV or radio regarding same sex marriage.. pro or against.

The problem with the Anti-SSM stuff is they continue to peddle bullshit lies. It's going to get nasty and I'm sorry - but yeah , I would have an issue with seeing an TV ad that my tax dollars went to that said that if I was to have children that would be child abuse.

No you need to stop talking because you continually refuse to see it from my point of view.. and why would you? You haven't had to live your life constantly assessing the risk to you if people knew if you were gay or not. You don't get it.

Since you've never actually been a LGBT youth who has contemplated suicide - that's why you simply don't feel it how we feel it.

This isn't like a game of bumper bowling where the ball gets to the pins regardless. There are social risks and the fact that you just can't/won't acknowledge that there is potential for harm to those in the LGBT community shows that you don't really give a shit about a few attempted suicides or deaths or bashings, bullying, harassment etc etc. And why would you? It doesn't affect you. So since it doesn't affect you and you have made it clear you don't have any interest in seeing the bigger picture - stop.

If you had said - "Hey yeah I still would have wanted it to happen, I see your point that there is a risk to vulnerable LGBT youth out there and this could and likely will get nasty but that's a risk I'm willing to take".. yet you continue to ignore it.

heh.. there is no risk to you.. so of course you'd take it. Sounds like you'd be one of those men who just can't understand why domestic violence victims don't just simply leave their abusers.

The SSM debate has been gathering steam for a while now.. eventually a major political party would take it on in their platform as people change, Mps change.. and in turn - the party changes.
Madmya
Forum Faggot
Forum Faggot
Posts: 19118
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 01:51 am
XBL ID: Madmya
Steam ID: Madmya
Location: Brisbane

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by Madmya »

Oh yeah, I'm a bigot to people who use the word bigot. As soon as I hear it I switch off and lump the person in a particular basket. It's Vzzbx's fault, he smashed that word.
User avatar
Ambrose Burnside
All accusations are unsubstantiated
All accusations are unsubstantiated
Posts: 8687
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 09:15 pm
XBL ID: AmbroseBurnside
Steam ID: Ambrose Burnside
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by Ambrose Burnside »

Yet another example of Queensland being Queensland

I just love the irony that the nutjob state is also the Land of Queens :rocco:
Currently playing: Age of Empires 2: Definitive Edition (PC), Far Cry 6 (PC), FIFA 21 (Series X), TimeSplitters 2 (Series X BC)
User avatar
GeneraL CyberFunK
Wants it in 8 Directions
Posts: 2896
Joined: 16 Dec 2006 03:28 pm
Location: Brisbane, QLD

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by GeneraL CyberFunK »

Madmya wrote:Oh yeah, I'm a bigot to people who use the word bigot. As soon as I hear it I switch off and lump the person in a particular basket. It's Vzzbx's fault, he smashed that word.
The word bigot has gotten completely out of hand these days, I will definitely agree with that. However I think the boundaries of what define someone as a bigot have changed also.

Someone who doesn't agree with same sex marriage but realises it doesn't affect them = not a bigot
Someone who doesn't agree with same sex marriage and goes out of their way to spout bullshit about it = bigot
Someone who doesn't agree with same sex marriage and says and does nothing = not a bigot

Someone who agrees with same sex marriage and goes out of their way to be horrible about religion = bigot
Someone who agrees with same sex marriage and states facts about the origins of marriage = not a bigot.

There variations are numerous
User avatar
Cletus
Hates Everyone Equally
Hates Everyone Equally
Posts: 15563
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 12:56 am
Location: Aboard the HMAS Todd Margaret
Contact:

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by Cletus »

And all white heterosexual men are racists and bigots by default.
User avatar
Ambrose Burnside
All accusations are unsubstantiated
All accusations are unsubstantiated
Posts: 8687
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 09:15 pm
XBL ID: AmbroseBurnside
Steam ID: Ambrose Burnside
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by Ambrose Burnside »

It's the WA state election today. Most noteworthy news nationally I guess would be the preference deal between the Libs and One Nation and the backstabbing of The Nationals. It reeks of desperation from the Libs and the approval ratings of both parties have plummeted since the deal was announced. One Nation has candidates quitting every day, including one last night :lol: But polls mean nothing these days, racist crazy anti-vaxxer nutters don't like admitting that they're racist crazy anti-vaxxer nutters publicly. Funny that.

Colin Barnett has been Premier since W was President. There's definitely a feeling of "it's time" in the air. The last election was an absolute landslide though and WA is a conservative state (although not nutter GameHED conservative like Queensland) so Labor do have a mountain to climb.

The Libs are such awesome economic managers though which means WA is broke after the greatest mining boom ever so most people seem to think Everest will be conquered today.
Currently playing: Age of Empires 2: Definitive Edition (PC), Far Cry 6 (PC), FIFA 21 (Series X), TimeSplitters 2 (Series X BC)
Madmya
Forum Faggot
Forum Faggot
Posts: 19118
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 01:51 am
XBL ID: Madmya
Steam ID: Madmya
Location: Brisbane

Re: Up the Mighty Liberals! #inmalcolmwetrust

Post by Madmya »

We've had 5 years of conservative government since 1989 in Queensland. In contrast, WA has had well over 10 years of conservative government in the same period of time. So to call QLD the more conservative state is just a bit of a stretch.

So how does it feel being in a more conservative state than Queensland?
Post Reply