Yes.
No.
Will not be voting.
The problem, as I see it, is that allowing same sex couples to actually marry takes us beyond tolerance and acceptance into the realms of endorsement and encouragement. Same sex couples now enjoy the same rights as married couples with a few exceptions which can and should be remedied by legislation. The SSM activists find anything unacceptable that does not involve making no distinction at all between same sex couples and heterosexual couples. Even calling heterosexual unions marriage and same sex unions something else, with the parties to each having exactly the same rights is not acceptable. They want society to make no distinction at all and regard and promote them as equally desirable. This is quite clear from what has happened in Britain and elsewhere, where we are already seeing the next steps in a continuing activist agenda. It is one thing to accept and tolerate something, another to endorse and promote it.Originally Posted by OSIRUS
What about the gender neutral toilets I have heard groups are pushing for in other parts of the world, to cater for minority groups who think they associate with another "gender"
Last edited by DB44; 09-09-17 at 01:31 PM.
According to the promoters of same-sex marriage, the issue is all about love, freedom, and equality......that is, of course, unless you happen to be opposed to it.
Supporters, opponents of same sex marriage clash outside Brisbane church
Footage of the stand-off showed pushing,shoving and shouting outside the Banks Street church, where yes campaigners had tried to disrupt a meeting of marriage reform opponents.
The old saying, "The squeaky wheel gets the oil" seems to be much in vogue these days.
More of the abovementioned behaviour will possibly see more of this:
Support for same-sex marriage falling and 'no' vote rising, advocate polling shows
Support for same-sex marriage has crashed ahead of the Turnbull government's postal survey, and only two-thirds of voters are inclined to take part, according to the latest polling from same-sex marriage advocates.
At the start of a two-month campaign, the confidential research provided to Fairfax Media shows support for a "no" vote has risen, as has the number of people who say they don't know how they will vote.
Perhaps people are tiring of the sound of squeaky wheels.
Looks like emotive words like "racist" are now acceptable by those that purport to believe in tolerance...
Same-sex marriage: Doctors in open conflict over ‘racism’ call in letter
The Australian
12:00AM September 8, 2017
Save
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on email
Share more...
943
Dennis Shanahan
Political Editor
Canberra
A petition backed by the AMA and signed by more than 2000 doctors accuses medical practitioners who oppose same-sex marriage of acting like racists and exposing gay people to increased risks of #depression and suicide.
Divisions within the medical profession over support for same-sex marriage have deepened, as a leading dissident doctor claimed he had been personally attacked and linked to racism in an open letter signed by doctors and medical students.
An open letter, written by Perth third-year medical student Carolyn O’Neil and attached to the petition, accused doctors such as former Tasmanian president of the Australian Medical Association Chris Middleton and 400 others opposed to the AMA position on same-sex marriage, of contributing to “increased depression, anxiety, self-harm, and suicidal behaviour”.
“To speak out against one sector of the community for wanting access to what everyone else can claim freely is discrimination in line with that historically practiced (sic) against non-white #people throughout the Western world,” the letter said.
Dr Middleton, who resigned from the AMA over its support for same-sex marriage, told The Australian he had been “abused” and “smeared” as a racist in an “astonishing and intemperate” attack. He said the open letter, which was distributed as part of the AMA’s newsletter, was the sort of personal attack on any doctor who questioned LGBQTI orthodoxy that “repulsed” the public.
read more
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull during Question Time in the House of Representatives at Parliament House in Canberra, Thursday, September 7, 2017. (AAP Image/Mick Tsikas) NO ARCHIVINGNext battle: SSM campaign rules
The row over the open letter follows revelations of another petition that sought to deregister Sydney GP Pansy Lai for appearing in a No campaign television advertisement. Concerns have also been raised by Greens leader Richard Di #Natale about #“conservative doctors” treating same-sex patients.
The petition against Dr Lai, facil#itated and later withdrawn by GetUp!, called on the AMA and the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Authority to deregister Dr Lai for a breach of medical ethics and the Geneva Conventions through her #participation in the recent No campaign.
The bitter medical dispute is taking place as the Coalition, Labor Party, Greens and marriage groups try to agree on rules for the postal survey debate that will now go ahead, following the High Court’s dismissal of Yes campaign activists’ challenges.
Mobile users can download the doctors’ letter here
Ms O’Neil stood by the references to racism in the open letter, which she said she drafted with input from other doctors, as being “valid historical parallels with previous experience”. “I don’t shy back from that, I stand by that and if you can’t see the parallels there is something wrong,” she told The Australian. Ms O’Neil said there were extreme arguments on both sides involving hurtful abuse that damaged the campaigns but said there was a focus on the racist #references in the letter which there “shouldn’t have been”. “I think part of the problem is that there is discomfort with the fact that we have been racist,” she said. “On both sides there has been quite vocal and nasty abuse, which makes both sides look bad.”
AMA president Michael Gannon has said he respected the right of Dr Middleton and his group, which includes former AMA state presidents and members, to have a different view. Dr Gannon has cited the open letter as evidence that not all the 30,000 AMA members agree with Dr Middleton.
Dr Middleton said last night: “May we suggest that such ad hominem attacks on any who question the LGBT orthodoxy is precisely what the public is repulsed by. We have made no such attacks, and we advise the authors and signatories of the rival document to reconsider their words.”
He said his group’s criticism of the AMA’s support for the Yes campaign was focused on the “scholarly integrity” of the AMA’s argument but the letter was an emotive attack. “It is emotive, indeed abusive, to equate opposition to same-sex marriage with the #racism of an earlier era. Any reasonable person who has read our measured critique of the research on same-sex parenting will be #astonished at the intemperate #attempt by this document to smear us as #little different to racists.”
The fact that there's a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven says a lot about the anticipated traffic flow.
@enf. Thanks. I saw that article. That ridiculous open letter is written by a third year medical student. Let's just hope it's a simple case of misguided youth given too much undeserved attention. Fortunately for her the loonies at Getup are not about to start a petition to stop her registration because of her misguided views, as they agree with them.
Last edited by DB44; 09-09-17 at 10:39 PM.
It is due to this type of behaviour that I will be voting no.
I think i will fill this Survey out.... in a big black texta "You want to get married?!?!?!"
If u want to go on an expedition get a Land Rover, if u want to come home from an expedition get a Landcruiser!
If you were in any doubt as to whether changing the definition of marriage would make people happy and that would be the end of the lobbying and demanding change, this should settle it for you:
Marriage has become an extremely important issue for LGBTIQ people. Yet it is just one step on a very very very long road.
I think that article has nailed it DB44, it's not so much the "equality" issue but the unintended consequences. Freedom of religion is just one thing that will fail under the new laws. If the homosexual lobby truly wanted equality, they would be happy to be one of the unwashed masses without the, 'Look at Me, I'm "different"' carry on. If they want to marry in a civil ceremony, all well and good, but, they'll not be happy if a particular religious body (be it Christian, Muslim, or Flying Spaghetti Monster) decides that they do not wish to support that lifestyle. It's illegal to commit murder, why don't all the murderers and those (ex husbands) lobby to get the law changed, I think that will obtain a more sympathetic vote. IYKWIM.
I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message...
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.
lsemmens (17-09-17)
I didnt like the vote for what it fails to cover, not for what it is trying to achieve so we both voted YES.
My wife did surprise me not because she voted Yes, but that she was very determined to do so.
I stand unequivicably behind everything I say, I just dont ever remember saying it !!
No
A big fat NO
Face it Gordon, she is not only sick of you but of all men and perhaps she thinks life would be better with another lady
P.S. any chance of opening this up so the rest of us can vote? Please!
Last edited by Neddie; 16-09-17 at 11:59 PM.
no forms arrived here yet but it will be a no
When I started the Poll it was just for a quick general idea of the numbers, so I put a fairly short time on it. However, it's become apparent now that many who want to vote have simply missed out. I would be happy for it to be re-opened. Over to you, Admin.
Reopened as per (multiple) requests.
Forms arrived here in NE Vic early last week.
Took them down to the P.O. to post, and had to get in line..........if our town is any indication, turnout is going to be significant, at least in country areas.
Papers not arrived here yet, but I'll be voting Yes.
It's not my cup of tea, but what rights do I have to stand in the way of happiness of others who are inclined that way? Them getting married is not going to impinge on my relationship, If they want this, good luck to them.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks