Reply With Quotegulliver (19-09-17)
But like traditional marriages, once married the oral sex will be the first thing to stopOriginally Posted by admin
Poor dog, sold a false promise.
If u want to go on an expedition get a Land Rover, if u want to come home from an expedition get a Landcruiser!
gulliver (19-09-17)
Because it cost so much of our tax paying money, its kind of a waste not to vote.
Plus you get to Vote NO and piss the gays off a bit
We all know they will keep pushing for it, so you might as well just piss them off some more
Last edited by ol' boy; 19-09-17 at 11:28 AM.
If u want to go on an expedition get a Land Rover, if u want to come home from an expedition get a Landcruiser!
gulliver (19-09-17),OSIRUS (19-09-17),VroomVroom (20-09-17)
....which will continue to cost taxpayer money and keep our pollies eternally occupied and distracted from the REAL problems we have.Because it cost so much of our tax paying money, its kind of a waste not to vote.
Plus you get to Vote NO and piss the gays off a bit
We all know they will keep pushing for it, so you might as well just piss them off some more
Just get over with it.
Gays just have to marry overseas and it will be already recognised in most states here anyhow + as mentioned above all civil rights involved with marriage are already covered for defacto (gay) relationships, blah, blah ....it is just a formality so they can hang a bit of paper on the wall and party.
The whole debate and this $120million opinion is totally pointless.
Update: A deletion of features that work well and ain't broke but are deemed outdated in order to add things that are up to date and broken.
Compatibility: A word soon to be deleted from our dictionaries as it is outdated.
Humans: Entities that are not only outdated but broken... AI-self-learning-update-error...terminate...terminate...
Or it has cost every single person in Australia $5
Or the average family home $20
So when you take kids under 18 out and those retired out, i'd hate to think what it has cost the average working tax payer!
120Million into cancer research would be 1000 times a better idea than this crap.
Last edited by ol' boy; 19-09-17 at 12:16 PM.
If u want to go on an expedition get a Land Rover, if u want to come home from an expedition get a Landcruiser!
Well, as i'm bored
The July working population for Australia is 12,222,000 people.
So that makes the survey cost $9.80 for every working person!
If u want to go on an expedition get a Land Rover, if u want to come home from an expedition get a Landcruiser!
Exactly, its just a survey a simple YES or NO, If it was to be of any benefit it should be a compulsory vote a vote that would mean something. Last count I hear was costs to $170 Mill just a ludicrous amount of wasted tax payers money
OSIRUS (19-09-17)
Rofl... only from the wife.once married the oral sex will be the first thing to stop
ol' boy (19-09-17)
Don't worry about the cost so much. It's already spent anyway, just vote and not waste it.
If you think about it, the money's not going overseas or into a dark abyss, it's just being passed around, it's going to Austpost, Bureau of statistics, printers etc...which means it's actually creating jobs.
Yes, jobs wasting peoples time.
If u want to go on an expedition get a Land Rover, if u want to come home from an expedition get a Landcruiser!
You fail to see the big picture.
If we do not continue to stand up to these minority leftist causes, the cost to the taxpayer will multiply times 1000000000000000.
Real problems ? Like why we have the most expensive power in the world for example ? The very same people banging the same sex drum are the very same anti coal people.
Its extremely important. Take a stand, or bend over and take one up the backside on this one (yes, almost literally given the topic), the electricity one, and all the other leftist causes that are crippling this country. GetUp are now basically running AGL.The whole debate and this $120million opinion is totally pointless.
I am an ex leftist protester. You know what happens when you win a cause ? You all go to an ALP/Union endorsed pub and get pissed (for free.....it Socialism, you dont pay for anything) as a maggot.
Come next Monday, you start the next campaign. Its doesnt end. Its just cause after cause after cause. Back in the 90's, it was a bit of "stick it up the government " fun, because back then no one actually listened to minority left wing socialists. For some strange reason, they are now allowed to bully and dominate anyone that doesn't agree with their cause. And as left wing Socialism is instilled in kids from school to university these days, there are many willing participants as well as the gullible who think they are "progressive".
DB44 (19-09-17),loopyloo (19-09-17),OSIRUS (19-09-17),VroomVroom (20-09-17)
And the more the Yes crowd persecute No voters, the bigger I will make the notice at the top of the forum. I am tipping size 72 font in the next month
loopyloo (19-09-17),VroomVroom (20-09-17)
I think todays editorial in the Australian is worth a read. I think its very well written......you may not, but thats your choice.
Many Australians already have cast votes — for want of a better word — by filling out and returning postal survey forms on whether to change the law to allow for same-sex marriage. Most people are likely to do the same in coming weeks as a debate that has bubbled along for almost a decade and has been a prominent political issue for at least two years reaches something of a crescendo. Given the issue goes to the building block of society, the family, the discussion has been superficial. Heated and protracted arguments about the process for delivering the change have competed with thrust and parry over equality and religious freedom. There has been little calm examination of what is really at stake, how this change may alter how society operates or the extent of our personal freedoms.
Sadly, discrimination against gay and lesbian Australians has occurred openly and officially until recent times. Laws cannot eradicate prejudice — we know intolerance over sexuality still exists — but state and federal measures across five decades have made it clear our society decries such discrimination or vilification. Change has been relatively rapid given homosexual acts between consenting adults were a criminal offence until South Australia became the first state to decriminalise in 1975. Victoria and NSW acted in the 1980s and it took Tasmania until 1997. Since then laws also have been passed to protect same-sex couples from all forms of discrimination and to ensure their financial interests are treated the same as that of heterosexual couples when it comes to de facto relationships, superannuation and the like. More controversially, all states also have acted to provide gay and lesbian couples the same rights when it comes to foster parenting, adoption, IVF and surrogacy.
Many of these reforms were introduced with little or no public debate or acrimony. Perhaps this is why the issues of family and parenting have been injected so robustly into the gay marriage debate. There is clear logic in the argument that says these issues have already been resolved and that the issue of marriage is therefore discrete from any redundant debate about same-sex parenting. Yet, in the real world, it is perhaps unrealistic to expect that the legal endorsement of gay marriage would not imply an added endorsement for same-sex parenting. Lesbian and gay parents understandably have hit back at suggestions their families are other than ideal. They argue marriage will not only help to affirm their relationships but also will provide legitimacy in the eyes of their children. Yet just as we should not question the love and care gay couples afford their children, neither should we diminish the devotion to children in families where couples choose not to marry or, indeed, where there are single parents or other permutations. Within all the variables of gender, sexuality, family breakdown and happenstance, we surely would agree the best interests of children are served by one crucial and non-variable ingredient: loving parenthood. Yet the extent to which we can discuss these issues, or will be after any change to the law, remains a bit of a mystery. Catholic Archbishop of Hobart Julian Porteous once was hauled before the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Commission for defending traditional marriage and families, so there are legitimate concerns that if same-sex marriage becomes law, state and federal human rights bodies could overreach on this issue, as they have on so many others.
This is why legislative detail is vital. It is not a matter of defending the so-called rights of a baker who doesn’t want to cater a gay wedding — such discrimination is illegal now and should remain so — but we must deftly protect the rights of Christians, Muslims and others who may oppose gay marriage to espouse and apply their moral codes without impinging on the rights of others. It is no easy task. What of the rights of teachers in Catholic or Muslim schools who wish to marry someone of the same sex? What of the rights of parents at that school? There is an intersection here between the public and the personal, the legal and the religious, that will be difficult to codify. This is why former prime minister John Howard has been right to say that the detail of the reforms should have been thrashed out before the public survey. Voters are being asked whether they support a reform to the law but are not being shown the precise nature of the changes. Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten, in unison, are asking for public trust while opponents, such as former prime minister Tony Abbott and the Australian Christian Lobby’s Lyle Shelton, have taken the chance to run a similar line to the anti-republican argument of the 1990s: if you don’t know, vote no.
The Australian is a newspaper that holds a strong predisposition towards personal liberty and responsibility. We want the state to involve itself in the personal lives of the people as little as is necessary. We also support the primacy of family in the life of the community and the nation. We believe marriage can strengthen families, even though many loving and successful families, by choice or circumstance, thrive and endure without it. We have been disappointed by the partisanship that has tarnished this debate and how arguments about process have delayed, demeaned and complicated the national discussion. This is an innately personal question. So we await with interest to see whether support for this reform as expressed in the privacy of the postal survey matches the strong endorsement recorded by most opinion polls in recent years. Yet we cannot endorse such a proposal sight unseen. We cannot abide the possibility of replacing one form of discrimination with another. If the public, as expected, indicates an appetite for change, the onus will fall on the Prime Minister to ensure the task of allowing the contract of marriage to be extended to same-sex couples can occur without silencing or intimidating those who hold a contrary view about legal arrangements or what they view as a religious sacrament.
Woolworths being boycotted because its CEO from 11 years ago doesn't support marriage equality. It gets more hilarious by the day. The Yes crowd have boycotted so many places they will have no where to shop soon.
Thala Dan (20-09-17)
Hahahaha.....I wonder if the leftist loonie let'em all in brigade expected this....
Is the enemy of my enemy my friend?
The fact that there's a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven says a lot about the anticipated traffic flow.
Rick (19-09-17)
Paywalled.
This type of thing is a nightmare. Because every time the morons put on this type of tantrum they seem to win. I really don't know if businesses are jumping at shadows or they have hard data to show these campaigns work. But companies are taking likely minority political positions which they have no business taking. Is the only effective counter-move for sensible people to threaten to boycott Woolworths or Qantas until they reverse their support? Or more reasonably, until they adopt a neutral position? The poor businesses are between a rock and a hard place, and the bullies are winning!
Thala Dan (20-09-17)
Hmmmm, sorry...It was OK...and I don't have an account, just Googs....
Muslim leaders using sermons to urge no vote in same-sex marriage plebiscite
KYLAR LOUSSIKIAN, NATIONAL POLITICAL REPORTER, The Daily Telegraph
September 19, 2017 8:25pm
Subscriber only
Miranda Devine: Muslims stay mum on same-sex marriage
Mark Latham: Marriage equality militants attack free speech
IMAMS and Islamic leaders are ramping up a campaign against same-sex marriage, using their sermons in mosques across Australia to urge the Muslim community to vote no.
Islamic Friendship Association of Australia head Keysar Trad has begun a tour of prayer halls in a bid to thwart same-sex marriage, comparing gay love to incestuous relationships#.
“We might love our mum and dad intensively but you don’t denigrate that love with sexual behaviour,” he said.
Former president of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils Keysar Trad has begun campaigning against same-sex marriage. Picture: Richard Dobson
And the Grand Mufti of Australia, Ibrahim Abu Mohamad, is understood to have told a Bankstown prayer hall on Friday that legislating same-sex marriage was the start of a change that could mean it would be illegal to tell children homosexuality was wrong.
“We should all love each other but that type of love ends in denigrating people; there is nothing to stop you from having the utmost love for your friends who might be the same gender but it doesn’t mean you strip naked together and start doing things,” Mr Trad, the recent past president of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, said.
The Australian National Imams Council says that Islam does not allow gay marriage and “marital relationship is only permissible between a man and woman”.
Grand Mufti of Australia Dr Ibrahim Abu Mohammed is believed to have preached that legalising same-sex marriage could lead to parents being prosecuted for telling children that homosexuality was wrong.
But mental health groups have warned the intensifying “vote no” campaign for the same-sex marriage postal survey was leading to a spike in requests for assistance from young gay people who were feeling scared or attacked.
Sheik Muhammad Saleem, a spokesman for the Victorian Board of Imams, said they were running a social media campaign urging their community to vote no.
“Like Catholic and Jewish people, we have always maintained marriage is between a man and a woman and that’s widely known to people,” he said.
Play
0:00
/
33:15
Fullscreen
AUSTRALIA: Muslim Women Discuss Controversial Quran Passage Regarding Marital Discipline April 08
“This is a democracy, we are being asked to vote, and we’ve had a say on that matter.”
The Grand Mufti did not respond to request for comment, but Mr Trad said Dr Mohamed gave a sermon on Friday where he expressed concerns the law, if changed, would stop parents telling children homosexuality was wrong.
Keysar Trad says many people in the Islamic community had received ‘homosexual overtures’ before. Picture: Richard Dobson
People who attended the sermon also said that he told them that they should vote no, along the lines that it would threaten their ability to tell their children about the rights and wrongs of that particular behaviour.
Mr Trad said many people in the Islamic community had received “homosexual overtures” before.
“It’s no secret people in general, wherever you are, are exposed to homosexuality in one way or another. It may be by seeing other people adopt homosexual behaviour or receiving homosexual overtures from other people …
“I doubt very much many people haven’t experienced one or more of those things.”
Leaders of other religions have also raised concerns same-sex marriage would lead to an erosion of religious freedoms.
WHAT THEY SAID
KEYSAR TRAD
“There is nothing to stop you from having the utmost love for your friends who might be the same gender but it doesn’t mean you strip naked and start doing things.”
“We might love our mum and dad intensively but you don’t denigrate that love with sexual behaviour.”
GRAND MUFTI OF AUSTRALIA, IBRAHIM ABU MOHAMAD
Understood to have told prayer hall that legislating same-sex marriage was the start of a change that could mean it would be illegal to tell children homsexuality is wrong.
The fact that there's a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven says a lot about the anticipated traffic flow.
Thala Dan (20-09-17)
although i selected yes in the poll posted on page1, i`m starting to lean towards a cbs voting.
Even though i do have several friends in same sex relationships, more females than males, i have since been hearing both the pros and cons of voting yes/no from other friends,
and the fact its more a survey than a mandated must votes, even if 50.01% vote yes, i cant see it going ahead and passing.
although i do find the between Sarah Hanson-Young & Pauline Hanson amusing though.
i do like to support and help my friends out where and when i can, a few of my female friends turned les after too much abuse from their boyfriends / husbands, and have never looked back,
infact a lot of them usually turn to me for advice, rather than their girlfriends (which is weird getting advice from a male, but hey)
although outside of the media (tv advertising) i have seen / heard nothing to do with the no campaign, well except for this post anyway.
reminds me of my news feed in facebook,And the more the Yes crowd persecute No voters, the bigger I will make the notice at the top of the forum. I am tipping size 72 font in the next month
"if you are voting NO, then please remove yourself from my friends list, or i`ll do it for you"
i think untill i get my form, i still have time to have a serious think, and look at things more from both the yes and no side, sure i could look at the third side
that of the church (and yes they fall under the no)
If i have helped you in anyway, dont forget to hit the Thanks button
“If debugging is the process of removing bugs, then programming must be the process of putting them in.”
Thanks, enf........I've had that happen as well.......sometimes I get straight in, other times not. (talking about websites, that is)
Would have Googled it, but didn't know how to get the article title.....found out now....copy and paste the link to get the full gist of it.
A bit scary when you find yourself aligned with Keysar Trad and the Grand Mufti, eh?
Strange times.
Judging by some of the stories popping up about the activities of some groups in relation to this poll/survey/plebiscite/vote, like door-knocking to collect unused forms, wads of forms being found discarded, on-line intimidation, and the like, I would be surprised if this poll does not attract a gaggle of lawyers challenging the legitimacy/veracity of the result.
The whole process is slowly turning into the messy, divisive, expensive waste of time that many foresaw.
It's a pity that, given the obvious determination of the Government to proceed with some form of public consultation, the Greens and Labor didn't have the good sense to just suck it up and allow the plebiscite to proceed.
That would have resulted in a far more orderly and clean process, given many of the legal protections afforded electoral processes overseen by the AEC.
Whilst I don't share Admins' total disdain for Bill Shorten, I do think that, in this instance, he has allowed political expediency to triumph over the public good.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks