Same sex marriage

Just interested in hearing what everyone thinks on this issue.

I'm in my mid 30s and live in melbourne. Im not sure i know anyone who would be against same sex marriage. i was wondering how popular this is with coalition voters, so i came here to find some.

What does eveyone think about not allowing liberal MPs a conscience vote - yet?

Do we really need a plebiscite?

 

TA was saying this morning that he doesn't want to have a vote on it for the duration of this term, but is willing to have a referendum on it after the next election.

I can't understand why there is so much importance thrown into this subject and pressure on the Pollies to take a stance.

Their job is to govern the Country; their views on gay or straight or religions are irrelevant to their job.

FWIW; I support gay marriage. I have gay relatives and friends - male and female, and I know countless more straight people who are divorced and onto 2nd and 3rd marriages etc.

A number of the gay folks I know have children - and are terrific parents, in loving households.

It is the 21st century, folks.

Anyone who is still anti-gay, or anti-gay marriage is - in my opinion - still living 2000 years ago.

 

I can't believe this is even a discussion point in this country.

 

I don't know why it has to be a referendum. It's not a constitutional matter.

It's a gutless move from a PM who doesn't want to make any hard decisions.

It's something which will not cost anything to implement, has the support of the vast majority of Australians and causes no harm to anyone else.

I agree. It's a non-issue. The amendment to the Act should be passed so we can all move on.. It's not going away.

 

So it can be enshrined in the constitution. That idea would really get Family first in a tizz.

 

Get it done and get over it! New generation don't even care...

 

They're a CONSERVATIVE government - if you want a radical reform, bat for the other side.

This is a social and equity issue, so needs a socialist sponsor.

There are issues of social equality which require reform and recognition of the status of ss partners but is marriage one step too far for a conservative TA (who has a sister in this situation)?

 

I think recognising and wishing to be part of an institution such as marriage, and stating that you wish to publicly show your commitment to that partner till death do you part is an inherently conservative action.

 

Just goes to show the people that make the rules in the country are very worried about their future employment rather then satisfy the needs of people in a free country.
I live next to Gay Men for over 25 years, now our daughters grew up with them living next door both are high end Doctors and when my Father was dying within our house and I was looking after him till the end every day they would both come over and help me each day,Gay Marriage should have been sorted out years ago,plus I don't criticize what I don't understand..

 

It's a great smoke screen for them actually making good policy or things that greatly benefit the country. It's a no brainer, the pollies are just using it to distract the media while they take their hover boards to the office

 

Dosent seem very contentious. So far posters are either supportive of same sex marriage or indifferent.

I cant work out why Abbott is letting it become such a devisive issue in his party and such a liability for his government and liberal MPs in urban seats.

 

Personally I'm not really for or against gay marriage. If it is or isn't available it's not going to have any affect on myself or most people for that matter. I'd be quite comfortable for marriage to be available to two consenting adults regardless of sexual orientation. I can say that I don't support the definition of marriage to include polygamy or bestiality.

That said, it's an important issue for many people. I also acknowledge that the majority of the community supports it. There are however so many more important issues that do need our time, attention and resources. Furthermore I don't see any reasonable argument that gay marriage better or worse than marriage as it's currently defined.

On that basis, I can't really see the merit in arguing against it. Eventually it is going to happen; you'd have to be ignorant to believe otherwise. The logical course of action is to simply allow a conscience vote on this issue and take it off the agenda.

Individual MPs are entitled to their personal opinion either way. Tony Abbot could easy win so many points by saying that personally he's not a supporter, but as a clearly important issue for many people he'll support a conscience vote.

This government has so many opportunities to demonstrate leadership but they continually pass it up for a political agenda. It's extremely disappointing. Equally disappointing is that I can't see an alternative party at the moment that is going to be much better in this regard.

 

It is rather intimidating to dare post anything rather than pro same sex marriage. Just be kind in your response.

The position I take is live and let live as long as you do no harm to anyone else.

So, what you do with each other in your own property is encroaching on no one else. Hopefully, your neighbour is not affected by any private practice. I take this stance.

If it is a new proclamation to claim a right, to exercise your right, it is also fine with me. Any impact on me? In the euphoria of 'coming of age' and ushering 'a new era', will existing rights be summarily marginalised, demonised and dismissed from this democracy?

I think the question is, what do I have to give up so you can claim a new right. Is my church affected? Is my religious practice vilified and dictatorially superseded? Will new laws be used to persecute any 'recalcitrants'? The question is am I losing my rights? Is the education of my child(ren) given only one view which promotes a philosophy of 'same sex marriage'.

On the other hand, what is so cogently pushing this issue? Most of the situations involving property rights, employment rights, family rights, government treatment rights, superannuation, etc have been ceded to proponents of same sex marriage. I have no problems with that.

So, what else do same sex proponents push for? On QA, this issue was discussed. To Phillip Ruddock's suggestion of an option of accepting same sex marriage, which follows the French legislative model of exempting religious practices, celebrity LGBTI proponent, Christine Forster responded with muted enthusiasm but volunteered intention of going for further achievement. It was a short exchange and this is what I make of it, and this intention has precedents of closet intentions overseas.

Anyone having any view other than pro same sex marriage, lock stock and barrel is feeling marginalised indeed.

 

Churches are already exempt from having to perform ceremonies they don't agree with and considering marriage is a civil act (from a legal point of view) and can be done outside of a church of any description I don't see why this would change.

 

I am a coalition voter. I am 100% in support of marriage equality.

I'm disappointed but unsurprised. After the previous government voted against the marriage equality bill, why should I be suprised. What I am surprised about is that the binding vote only applies to the front bench, not the back bench. My understanding is that back bench MPs can vote as they feel they should. I didn't know that.

Definitely not! We live in a representative democracy and voted in people to represent us.

It will be interesting to see if the bill gets put to the vote and who votes to support. I am interested to see if any of the front bench cross the floor and also how many Labor pollies vote against the bill this time around.

 

It will happen sooner or later. It would be interesting to see if the latest trick Tony Abbott implemented to halt any action on same-sex marriage might be his undoing in the Liberal party.

I read this morning that if any front-bencher votes in favour of same-sex marriage they risk their positions.

I will enjoy some pop-corn and see how this plays out.

 

One thing that was always important to the Liberal party was conscience votes. It was a mark of distinction between them and the ALP. Particularly when it comes to matters of personal morals or ethics.

It is such a shame to see that man erode such a fundamental part of the party for his own ideological beliefs.