Same sex marriage - Yes or No?

[Tink]

And the yes brigade were wrong.
It should have been a referendum on any changes, going by the constitution.

Is the constitution still valid, as we seem to have a mess in parliament.
Too many public servants warming their seats.

 

[overhang]

Howard altered the Marriage Act without any type of public vote, this is just grasping at straws now. The will of the people have spoken and they have voted yes.

 

[PZ99]

^ Correct. It should have been a referendum in 2004 when the marriage act was meddled with in the first place.

Moving the goalposts to suit your desired outcome is a step towards communism.

The mess in parliament is a result of pollies not doing their homework and they deserve the same sympathy as people get from the ATO when they mess up their tax returns: the COLD standard

 

[Tink]

So going against what the founding fathers had hoped for, we now move into tyranny?

 

[PZ99]

More like "freedom".

 

[Tisme]

Freedom of religion is just the freedom to discriminate. It's not really possible in this case to protect both freedom of religion and peoples right not to be discriminated against. Right now a baker can't refuse to bake a cake for a couple entering a civil union, I don't see why the law should be changed so that they can refuse a marriage. I baker would still be able to say "Just so you know I morally object to your marriage, would you still like me to proceed with your cake?". Common sense is going to prevail under most circumstances in this case and the gay couple would probably choose another bake that is happy to have their business.

That's just supposition and rhetoric.

We all know that we have lost our freedoms of association, freedom of custom to provide goods and services, etc. We are infact a utility of govt policy.

We all know that legislation in the future will be governed by on the prevailing interpretation in that future. This no more obvious than the citizenship test being black and white, but the LNP trying to make it a blur for it's own gain. No more obvious than the excuse of "love" as a binding agent for marriage in an act that does not embrace love as a considered variable.

We all know this is just another fad from a bored community acting out a rebellion looking for a cause and prepared to hijack any social norms to get the adrenalin going.

Just remember that when the legislation turns around and bites you or you rfamily on the bum ... it's all your fault for tinkering with a millenial custom.

 

[Tisme]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...e/news-story/a522aee7894e7aa7357600b85ffcdaac

The new deity is the secular religion of same-sex marriage
The Daily Telegraph
November 20, 2017 11:00pm
Subscriber only
STRANGE things are happening to our country.

National icons are being denigrated, simply for holding an opinion based on their religious beliefs.

Take the case of tennis legend Margaret Court — the most successful player in the history of the game, winning 24 grand slam singles titles in the 1960s and ’70s.

She holds the amazing record of never losing a match while playing for Australia. Today she serves as a pastor at Perth’s Victory Life Church, helping more than 10,000 disadvantaged families each year with food parcels, health services and counselling. This is what left-wing activists used to do before they fell in love with symbolic identity politics.

They actually met the poor and helped them in person — something Pastor Margaret does every day.

I’m not a Christian and I’ve certainly never been a tennis player, but for some reason I can’t stop thinking about Mrs Court’s situation.

“I love all people” but “I also believe in marriage as a union between a man and a woman as stated in the Bible”. - Margaret Court

For a woman so great, for someone who has served her nation with impeccable skill, dignity and compassion for more than half a century, how has she now become one of the most abused figures in Australian public life?

The problem is she’s a nonbeliever.

Sure, she believes in a Christian God. But that’s no longer a test of character in politics.

To be accepted, to be part of the “in-crowd”, one needs to believe in a new deity: the secular religion of same-sex marriage (SSM).

Margaret Court has been banned from mentoring tennis players at a high school in Western Australia due to her religious beliefs. Art: John Tiedemann
In late May, Mrs Court wrote a letter to the West Australian newspaper declaring she could no longer fly with Qantas, given the airline’s public campaign for gay marriage.

It was a straightforward statement of her convictions.

She wrote of how, “I love all people” but “I also believe in marriage as a union between a man and a woman as stated in the Bible”.

Mark Latham. Picture: Dylan Robinson
Immediately, the voices of “tolerance” and “inclusion” shouted her down, demanding she be excluded from our nation’s sporting history — rewritten out of existence.

They wanted the Margaret Court Arena in Melbourne renamed.

In Perth, the Cottesloe Tennis Club sacked her at its patron.

In Albury-Wodonga, the Margaret Court Tennis Academy was physically attacked.

But that’s not all.

There was another act of exclusion for which the details are only starting to emerge publicly.

This incident, perhaps the worst of all, was lost in the noisy clatter of the recent debate.

Yet now, as federal Parliament legislates for SSM, it highlights the pressing need for the protection of religious freedoms.

Two weeks after her letter about Qantas, Mrs Court received correspondence from Dr Megan Lloyd, chairwoman of the Board of the John Forrest Secondary College, a government school in Perth.

For many years Mrs Court had been patron of the college’s Specialist Tennis Program.

According to Lloyd, she had fulfilled this role superbly, “sharing your tennis wisdom in talks with our students”.

“As a tennis player with an unparalleled world-class record, you speak with authority on tennis matters and our students have greatly benefited”, the chairwoman wrote. But then came the sting, the Star Chamber test of ideological purity.

Lloyd claimed that Mrs Court’s views “concerning family and sexuality diverge from those held by this school”.

Pastor Margaret is a supporter of the nuclear family, believing that children are better off if both their biological parents raise them.

According to her Bible teachings, she regards homosexuality as sinful.

In her letter, Lloyd presented no evidence of how these views were relevant to the teaching of tennis.

People play and watch sport, not for its religious or political content, but as an expression of physical prowess. Lloyd concluded her letter by demanding that Mrs Court comply with the school’s values of “diversity and inclusivity” regarding “different sexual identity”.

Otherwise she could no longer “be promoted to our students”.

Amazingly, the Western Australia Education Minister, Labor’s Sue Ellery, has supported the actions of the school board.

Sometimes it is said there will be no persecution of Christians under SSM laws because only a small minority of gays are intolerant.

Education Minister Sue Ellery has backed the decision.
Please understand what has happened in Western Australia.

A state minister has endorsed a policy of excluding committed Christians from school sporting academies.

A precedent has been set for forcing out of the education system people who do not believe in homosexuality and SSM.

Mrs Court wasn’t teaching sex education at John Forrest; she was a tennis mentor.

Presumably the same rule now applies to Muslims who, under the teachings of the Koran, also regard homosexuality as sinful.

I put this question to Lloyd and Ellery but neither responded.

This is the problem with this sort of thinking about same-sex marriage.

In wanting to exercise social control, they are not content with people simply respecting homosexuality — that is, acknowledging its place in society.

Instead, they want a community celebration and promotion of it.

If people fail to do so, they will be expelled from government institutions and/or prosecuted under anti-discrimination laws.

In a society dominated by diversity and difference, mutual respect acts as the glue that stops citizens from attacking each other.

If any group makes excessive demands — in this case, forcing Christians and Muslims to comply with the new orthodoxy — the system of social tolerance and balance breaks down.

This is a very dangerous time for Australia.

Step by step, we are moving closer to police-state powers enforcing the radical demands of identity politics.

 

[overhang]

That's just supposition and rhetoric.

We all know that we have lost our freedoms of association, freedom of custom to provide goods and services, etc. We are infact a utility of govt policy.

We all know that legislation in the future will be governed by on the prevailing interpretation in that future. This no more obvious than the citizenship test being black and white, but the LNP trying to make it a blur for it's own gain. No more obvious than the excuse of "love" as a binding agent for marriage in an act that does not embrace love as a considered variable.

We all know this is just another fad from a bored community acting out a rebellion looking for a cause and prepared to hijack any social norms to get the adrenalin going.

Just remember that when the legislation turns around and bites you or you rfamily on the bum ... it's all your fault for tinkering with a millenial custom.

Nothing is really altering here, you currently can't refuse service to gays because you disagree with their lifestyle choice and this shouldn't change. You lost that right a long time ago and nothing is changing that.

 

[Tisme]

Nothing is really altering here, you currently can't refuse service to gays because you disagree with their lifestyle choice and this shouldn't change. You lost that right a long time ago and nothing is changing that.

Exactly, but we just added more layers to the prevent freedom resurfacing.

 

[Tisme]

oh btw, the new proxy wars in SE Asia is starting. Cambodia seems to be leaning Red and about to get sanctioned; the Yanks have finally figured out a way to feel the pain of the Muslims in Myanmar without ruining their image of Islam being evil and them clash of civilisation talking point.

I think a few close call on Duterte got him to open to talks with Yanks again.

Duterte is a petulant child and has been dealt with.

Cambodia has two masters to concern itself with : Vietnam and USA. If the Viets wanted it to be communist it would have done so when it invaded in 1979 and ruled for 10 years until Bill Hayden's peace negotiations finally broke through.

 

[wayneL]

By Jesus if I haven't read that same post a dozen times.

The TRUTH is that this religious freedom bull**** is nothing more than maintaining the churches ability to continue to discriminate.

So is it your position that no form of discrimination is acceptable? (be careful of the own goal here)

 

[luutzu]

Duterte is a petulant child and has been dealt with.

Cambodia has two masters to concern itself with : Vietnam and USA. If the Viets wanted it to be communist it would have done so when it invaded in 1979 and ruled for 10 years until Bill Hayden's peace negotiations finally broke through.

Cambodia was VN's junior but they've since gone Red further North. That's why the US is going to sanction Hun Sen [?]... for violating democracy or something.

That and the Comrades in Hanoi are too busy stealing their own peasants' land and what luxury food not to eat lest they go the way a couple of senior generals went after a visit to Beijing in which they didn't kiss the ring with enough passion.

Yea, Duterte, what a childish right wing nut job. You don't permit extra-judicial killing of small time drug pushers and users you idiot. You should follow the US model of justice where you bring those stupid kids in, pretend to have a trial in which no lawyer represents them, then you lock them up for 10 to 20 years for pushing drugs.

At $40k a year per head, locking up some hundreds of thousands or a million... that's kaching, kaching, kar ching.
On top of that, you can hire them out at market rate but pay them a buck a day; then charge their loved ones crap load for phone calls, visits etc. etc.

Justice, freedom and money.

As to appeasing the Chinese, that's even crazier. Handing the Chinese a few corals and rights to your economic zones, why would you do that when you can buy hundreds of millions in US made weapons, bullets and sovereignty to see which side blink first.

 

[sptrawler]

Now to address bestiality.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bestiality-legal-canada-supreme-court-a7073196.html

I suppose we have to get all the ducks lined up, before the NBN is up and running, then download censorship won't cause a drama. lol

 

[Tisme]

How senators voted on same-sex marriage

• Australian Associated Press
• 2:24PM November 29, 2017
• Save
• • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on email
  • Share more...

'YES' VOTERS (43)

Liberal Simon Birmingham George Brandis David Bushby Mathias Cormann Jonathon Duniam Mitch Fifield Ian McDonald Nigel Scullion Anne Ruston James Paterson Jane Hume Marise Payne Linda Reynolds Scott Ryan Dean Smith

Labor

Carol Brown Catryna Bilyk Doug Cameron Kim Carr Anthony Chisholm Kimberley Kitching Sue Lines Jenny McAllister Malarndirri McCarthy Claire Moore Louise Pratt Lisa Singh Anne Urquhart Murray Watt Penny Wong

Greens

Andrew Bartlett Richard Di Natale Sarah Hanson-Young Nick McKim Lee Rhiannon Janet Rice Jordon Steele-John Rachel Siewert Peter Whish-Wilson

Crossbench Stirling Griff; Rex Patrick NXT) David Leyonhjelm (Liberal Democrats) Derryn Hinch

'NO' VOTERS (12)

Labor Chris Ketter Helen Polley

Liberals Concetta Fierravanti-Wells Eric Abetz Slade Brockman

Nationals John Williams Matt Canavan Barry O'Sullivan

Crossbench Lucy Gichuhi Fraser Anning Cory Bernardi Brian Burston (One Nation)

DID NOT VOTE (17)

Liberals Michaelia Cash David Fawcett James McGrath Zed Seselja Arthur Sinodinos (on leave)

Nationals Bridget McKenzie

Labor

Jacinta Collins Sam Dastyari Pat Dodson Don Farrell Alex Gallacher Katy Gallagher Gavin Marshall (overseas) Deb O'Neill Glenn Sterle

One Nation

Pauline Hanson Peter Georgiou

 

[basilio]

From Parliament House


"I am very firmly of the view that families are the foundation of our society and ours would be a stronger society if more people were married and by that I mean formally, legally married and
fewer were divorced. If consulted by friends at about marital dramas I always encouraged the singles to marriage, the married to stick together and the wronged to forgive."


"Let's be honest with each other, the threat to traditional marriage is not from gay people but a lack of loving commitment, whether found in the form of neglect, indifference, cruelty or adultery, to name just a few manifestations of that loveless desert in which so many marriages come to grief.


"Co-dependency is a good thing", he says, and gay people are better off together than "living alone comforted only by their respective cats".


(*coughs*)

 

[Tisme]

More theatre with the Senate being misused for a proposal of an illegal marriage.

One rule for some ....................

 

[basilio]

You are so xxxxing lame Tisme. Give it a rest. Even Tony Abbott (God help us) has discovered some form of good grace in acknowledging the will of the Australian public.

 

[basilio]

But back to our Parlimentarians waxing eloquent on their new found consensus.

"I think this is an uplifting moment in our nation but we need to be mindful to match our joy without humility. Humility to acknowledge that on so long on marriage equality, Australia has trailed the world. The humility to seek forgiveness from LGBTQI Australians, forgiveness for long delay, for the injustices and the indignities both great and small. The gift less for subjecting you and your relationships to public judgement. Forgiveness for the hurt and harm your and your families have suffered. We seek your forgiveness, we salute your courage and we thank you for including us in your historic moment."

 

[Tisme]

You are so xxxxing lame Tisme. Give it a rest. Even Tony Abbott (God help us) has discovered some form of good grace in acknowledging the will of the Australian public.

I'm not surprised you have no sincerity when it comes to parliament and parliamentary esteem. You constantly show no regard for any respect of authority, discipline and self control.

So being as I really don't think you have the capacity for common sense and prefer the easy mob mentality social fads I forgive you for you lack of civic duty. See I'm the bigger man, if you are a man that is because you do come across as a teenager looking for causes.

 

[Tisme]

But back to our Parlimentarians waxing eloquent on their new found consensus.

"I think this is an uplifting moment in our nation but we need to be mindful to match our joy without humility. Humility to acknowledge that on so long on marriage equality, Australia has trailed the world. The humility to seek forgiveness from LGBTQI Australians, forgiveness for long delay, for the injustices and the indignities both great and small. The gift less for subjecting you and your relationships to public judgement. Forgiveness for the hurt and harm your and your families have suffered. We seek your forgiveness, we salute your courage and we thank you for including us in your historic moment."

you are so xxxxing lame basillo. Give it a rest. Even Tony Abbott (God help us) votes Liberal.