Using VC's logic, I would suggest the Irish would love to have a second crack at the SSM vote ......
So if it does get up here should the opposite side get to have as many votes as it takes to reverse the perverse?
The gay lobby want the politicians to keep voting until they get it "right" .
The anti-referendum, 'equality' crowd - have already lost the argument once they start advocating the abandonment of democratic principles to get their own way.
Here's the inconvenient thing about a plebiscite: it forces full ventilation of all the arguments on each side. Yet our morally superior betters in the same sex marriage lobby shrink away from that.
So many of those lecturing us on the cost of a $150 mill plebiscite - were the same ones who sat idly by while Rudd-Gillard-Rudd drove the national accounts to the brink, billions into deficit.
If the same-sex marriage case is so strong, what is there to fear from everyday Australian exercising their democratic right to have a say?
Gays will have to wait a little longer to hop aboard the Jenny Macklin cadged hand outs gravy train.
I am not scared of a referendum, I think we would win easily.
However, I am just pointing out the popularity of an idea says nothing about whether its the right thing to do.
eg, If the southern US states voted to keep slavery, would that make slavery moral? Yes or NO.
And would the government in the USA be justified in Banning enslaving a minority even if the majority voted to allow it? Yes or NO
However, I am just pointing out the popularity of an idea says nothing about whether its the right thing to do.
Surely you must realise that the idea of "right" and "wrong" is a personal judgement ?
.
Gay Marriage is wrong to religious people because their Bibles tell them that it is.
You and I may think that their beliefs are laughable but they have them anyway and as you have said they have a right to have them, whether they are politicians or members of the public.
.The idea of Marriage as an institution is becoming outdated as many couples decide not to bother anyway. Civil Unions provide the same Rights, as do even de facto relationships, so any comparison with slavery is really absurd
SSM is a trivial issue when it comes to the other problems confronting the country
Exactly, so why would a trivial issue require a plebiscite?
Are you taking the Shorten line that gays need to be protected from the No case ?
Yes, its the governments duty to provide for and protect the inalienable human rights of its citizens.
The Government should not set up a situation where a majority group has the opportunity to deny a minority group its fundamental human rights.
Marriage is not a fundamental human right.
It's an official recognition of a relationship. People generally should have rights to form relationships with whoever they choose, but society puts some restraints on this through age, mental capacity and kinship for the protection of the individual and society.
Should we recognise marriages between 11 year olds ?
Of course the argument is that gays do not need protection as long as they fulfill other requirements, I'm just saying that marriage is not a "inalienable right", if such things really exist except in the collective mind of society.
Marriage is not a fundamental human right.
.
Should we recognise marriages between 11 year olds ?
Of course the argument is that gays do not need protection as long as they fulfill other requirements, I'm just saying that marriage is not a "inalienable right", if such things really exist except in the collective mind of society
Well marriage is a social construct that humans employ, they exist regardless whether the government recognises them or not.
.
Well marriage is a social construct that humans employ, they exist regardless whether the government recognises them or not.
Sorry to nitpick, but it's the relationships that exist, marriages don't untill they are officially recognised.
Yeah but you want our govt to interfere with that and force our social construct to accept your social construct.... and our social construct gets to pay the costs associated with your social construct.
, I just want the government to recognise marriages equally
Isn't that what they are doing already?
Nope, they only recognise marriages between one man and one woman, they refuse to recognise the marriages between two men or two women.
So why not 5 women and 1 man ? After all it's not the governments business if they all consent is it ?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?