enf (21-09-17),Uncle Fester (23-09-17)
Just on that BUMSEX thing I'm thinking it was either a hoax or the ABS taking the piss.
When you run those figures through a barcode generator it looks completely different.
"The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) said the codes were issued using an algorithm generating more than two quintillion combinations of letters and numbers "to generate highly secure barcodes".
It apologised for the potentially "offensive" words and said it will issue a new form if requested.
Jonathan Palmer, deputy statistician for the government agency, said: "The ABS acknowledges that in issuing 16million barcodes, it did not check and remove words and phrases that may be offensive."
enf (21-09-17),Uncle Fester (23-09-17)
100% agree on all your points stated above. Thx
I would imagine to make it a binding contract between ALL couples once the union of marriage is made available to any couple wishing to commit to a marriage. Not just those who need religion and a god as a crutch.I'm not really sure why the federal government is even involved with marriage, other than to keep a record of it. It should just be a civil matter like most contracts.
Then it would be a good chance to trial voting online prior to a State or Federal or even a local election. Seeing these stupid letters are fooking up re security and cost wise for a non binding vote. If this gutless government wanted an indication of how to vote a bloody phone/internet poll would have achieved the same result at a fraction of the cost.Being able to vote online or over the phone for popular issues would in theory, reduce the costs considerably. It would be much faster to get the results and a lot easier to vote regularly. There would of course need to be a lot of security and fraud protection.
The biggest online survey I know of is the ABC vote compass poll that was carried out between May and July last year. This had around 750K responses.
Additionally they've broken down the results into each seat as follows in the table...
They also did a "heat map" (for want of a better expression )Code:Lowest to highest of YES % MARANOA 42% HINKLER 43% FLYNN 44% GROOM 45% KENNEDY 46% BLAXLAND 46% PARKES 47% WRIGHT 47% CHIFLEY 47% MCMAHON 48% CAPRICORNIA 48% DAWSON 48% RANKIN 49% GREENWAY 49% FORDE 49% LONGMAN 49% WERRIWA 50% BARKER 50% WIDE BAY 51% BLAIR 51% CANNING 51% NEW ENGLAND 51% LYNE 51% O'CONNOR 51% BANKS 51% PETRIE 52% GREY 52% PARRAMATTA 52% WATSON 52% BRADDON 52% RIVERINA 52% MITCHELL 52% FOWLER 52% CALWELL 53% BURT 53% MACARTHUR 53% BOWMAN 53% HUME 53% DICKSON 53% DURACK 53% BRUCE 53% HUGHES 54% LINDSAY 54% FAIRFAX 54% COOK 54% BONNER 54% FADDEN 54% FARRER 54% WHITLAM 54% PATERSON 55% MURRAY 55% HOLT 55% LYONS 55% LINGIARI 55% FISHER 55% BEROWRA 55% CALARE 55% OXLEY 55% HUNTER 55% PAGE 55% COWPER 55% BASS 55% FORREST 55% LEICHHARDT 55% GILMORE 55% MALLEE 55% HASLUCK 56% MONCRIEFF 56% PEARCE 56% HERBERT 56% BENNELONG 56% COWAN 56% SHORTLAND 56% GIPPSLAND 56% MCPHERSON 56% TANGNEY 57% DOBELL 57% MAKIN 57% MORETON 57% ROBERTSON 58% MACQUARIE 58% MOORE 58% WAKEFIELD 58% GORTON 58% BARTON 58% BRAND 58% EDEN-MONARO 58% WANNON 58% ASTON 58% CUNNINGHAM 59% SCULLIN 59% MENZIES 60% KINGSTON 60% BRADFIELD 60% LALOR 60% MACKELLAR 60% MAYO 61% LILLEY 61% RICHMOND 61% MCMILLAN 61% FRANKLIN 61% STURT 61% MCEWEN 61% REID 61% SWAN 62% HINDMARSH 62% DEAKIN 62% STIRLING 62% BOOTHBY 63% RYAN 63% PORT ADELAIDE 63% SOLOMON 63% CHISHOLM 64% CASEY 64% INDI 64% NEWCASTLE 64% LA TROBE 64% CORIO 64% FREMANTLE 64% CORANGAMITE 64% BENDIGO 65% FLINDERS 65% BALLARAT 65% HOTHAM 65% CURTIN 66% ADELAIDE 66% DUNKLEY 66% MARIBYRNONG 66% ISAACS 67% KINGSFORD SMITH 67% GRIFFITH 68% PERTH 68% KOOYONG 68% JAGAJAGA 68% BRISBANE 69% NORTH SYDNEY 69% WARRINGAH 70% DENISON 70% CANBERRA 70% FENNER 71% GOLDSTEIN 73% GELLIBRAND 73% HIGGINS 74% WILLS 75% BATMAN 76% GRAYNDLER 77% WENTWORTH 78% MELBOURNE 78% MELBOURNE PORTS 79% SYDNEY 79%
Thala Dan (21-09-17)
Originally Posted by Tiny
Next of kin will always be a persons closest living biological relatives, marriage doesn't change that.
It is by definition & still observed in some countries & some states of Australia.
South Australia for one still go by this,next of kin
noun
- a person's closest living relative or relatives.
synonyms: closest relative, closest relation, nearest blood relation/relative, closest family member, "in the case of childless couples, your next of kin are your parents"
Next of Kin
There is no formal legal recognition or legal rights of 'next of kin'. Certain Acts have given a restricted definition such as the Transplantation and Anatomy Act 1983 (SA) [s 5], which gives a priority as to who makes decisions concerning the donation of organs and tissue, see organ donation. Section 9 of the Burial and Cremation Act 2013 (SA) allows a parent or child of a deceased person to object to cremation, except where the deceased directed he or she be cremated by will or other signed and witnessed document (but a spouse or partner, unless they are also the personal representative - executor of the estate - of the deceased person cannot object).
Some Countries/States have definitions that allow Spouses to be Next of Kin, But that gets complicated too & yes, the same sex marriage debate is argued to solve any ambiguities.
Fact is an enduring power of attorney along with a properly documented will & nominating your partner as executor of your estate, clears up most legal issues.
Edit; Perhaps what I should have said in my original post is; Marriage does not in itself necessarily solve Next Of Kin legal issues.
Last edited by Tiny; 21-09-17 at 01:31 PM.
Cheers, Tiny
"You can lead a person to knowledge, but you can't make them think? If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
The information is out there; you just have to let it in."
There is a fine line between "Hobby" and "Madness"
Thala Dan (21-09-17)
You would have no doubt seen the stupidity of the AFL yesterday getting involved to tell us all we are stupid unless we support gay marriage.
An online poll at the Herald Sun shows that an amzing 65% think the AFL should butt out. And thats from the Leftyist State in Australia.
I loved Mark Knight's cartoon in the HS today :
While its interesting, I doubt the figures would be too reliable now given that I think many have in fact changed from Yes to NO. However the vote was rigged for a Yes win the day Labor and The Greens blocked the plebiscite, so nothing is really relevant in regards to polls on this topic.
Just out of interest, I am 50 and have never in my life been contacted by pollsters.
Neither have I. That survey was done during the election last year... when a plebiscite was announced, so people would have voted based on that. The recent Essential polls have a similar result but the NO is gaining ground without a doubt.
That's what I thought when I read it.
The section on "When does it matter" basically says an Enduring POA & a Will solves most issues.
BTW: Any of you married people that do not have an Enduring Power of Attorney for your partner & yourself, will one day find out the legal ramifications of mental illness.
A marriage certificate does not make you the legal or financial guardian of your spouse.
I have first hand experience with this when my FIL was mentally disabled overnight & could no longer legally sign a contract. Things that were in his name only, like his car, could not be sold by his wife (my MIL)without a POA, so we had to contact the courts who then placed my FIL under the protective custody of the Office of The Protective Commissioner (OPC).
So what you say, they then took control of all his assets & his share of the assets in joint ownership with MIL (his wife) & took a percentage of assets & a percentage of annual income earned on those assets, for managing those assets.
Anything we wanted to do with or for him had to be approved by the Protective Commissioners Office first, including selling their jointly owned home. All this goes on until he died 3 years later, then the will comes into effect & all assets returned to MIL.
Think about it?? It's not pretty & a marriage certificate does not trump a POA or the OPC.
Cheers, Tiny
"You can lead a person to knowledge, but you can't make them think? If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
The information is out there; you just have to let it in."
In hindsight I should have posted my Facebook status as: "I've blown the head gasket on my 1997 XR3i" rather than "I've just buggered a 14 year old escort".
The police still haven't seen the funny side, my lap top's been confiscated and the wife has gone off to her mum's.
That's a great post Tiny and anyone reading it would be well-advised to take action to put an EPOA in place if they haven't already, regardless of their age, marital status, state of health and the size of their assets ... or sexual orientation. I'd add to that an Advance Health Directive so that your NOK and/or Attorney CLEARLY and formally knows your wishes regarding your ongoing care should you become non compus mentus or otherwise not able to make your own health decisions. That takes away any feelings of doubt or guilt or potential for argument because even if you've previously discussed your wishes with them and the others in your family, there might be someone who doesn't want to 'pull the plug' even if you'd verbally made clear your wishes are not to be artificially ventilated should you flatline, for example.
Back on topic, I was tapped in an automated phone poll about SSM a short while back. At the time, i hadn't really thought much about it so my knee-jerk reaction was 'Feck it, marriage is between male and female' so i pressed the button for 'no'. Now having listened to much of the histrionics and rot from both camps i'm leaning to 'yes'. Reason being, it's not going to affect me 'cos at 70 i'll not start batting for the other team. There are no gays or lesbians in my family but over the years i've dealt with many in business and even employed more than a couple of openly gay ppl and maybe some of 'them' who hid it. Mostly i found that in other ways there's no differences between 'them' and 'us'. Giving them a piece of paper saying they are 'man & man' or 'wife & wife' or woteva isn't going to help or hinder me really but it might make some of them very happy. Another reason is maybe it will make both the 'loony left' and 'holier than thou right' shut the f*** UP! I'm sick of them all to be frank. Provided we can then move on by putting that issue behind us of course and not move onto other so-called issues. I have a sneaking suspicion that the far left will then want to use a yes decision as the thin edge of the wedge and move even harder on 'gender fluidity' for our kids. If they do that's when i'll big-time harden up and i suspect i'll not be Robinson Crusoe because gay marriage is one thing but telling little kids that only they can decide if they are a boy or a girl because the gender fairy might have got it wrong furs me up big time. I have 9 grandkids, 7 of them are in school and it'll be 8 next year. I thank Christ [literally] that none of them are going to State Schools.
Neddie (21-09-17)
Last edited by cobra679; 21-09-17 at 11:07 PM.
For some reason I can't seem to get a decent image size, the text of the attached image is
And another thing Francis...
all this fuss over same sex marriage.
I just don't see
what the big deal is.
Harvey and I have been
having the same sex for 54 years
and to tell you the truth
It isn't worth getting
all upset over.
Last edited by lsemmens; 23-09-17 at 03:14 PM.
I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message...
loopyloo (23-09-17)
I just got a spam text from the yes cocksuckers, isn't that illegal ?
Sent from my LON-L29 using Tapatalk
Ditto... not happy.
Same here, but at 2:30, no idea how they got my number, I'm on the do not call register.
Would love to know who is paying for it?
Bookmarks