Same sex marriage

What was suprising was the number of ALP MPs and Senators that voted against the bill. It was really quite mediocre support. That some of those same people are making a song and dance about it now is quite pathetic really.

 

Politicians are only remembered for their worst mistakes, but most would be more worried about their future jobs ,if they had the balls they could have fixed this up a long time ago,if Abbott goes into the next election without this fixed up then the outcome is predetermined..

 

Immoral and illogical. Would any party allow a conscience vote to discriminate against women, certain religious groups, races or coloured people?

 

I think putting up a bill and then voting it down is worse than not voting at all. It gives people hope and then cruelly takes it away. I think what @LibGS was trying to get at is that it was wrong for a party that is fundamentally against discrimination to let it's members vote to discriminate. There is an argument that there should have been a binding vote because the propsal was in line with the ALPs values.

 

I hate saying "who cares, just let them do it!" Because it devalues a massive issue for the people concerned but, I'm sick of hearing about it. Maybe if someone explained to TA the economic boost of letting a bunch of super flamboyant LGBTI guys and girls wed he would change his mind.

 

If Labor is a socially progressive party, then discrimination has no place there. But the 2 major parties are only for being reelected. If Shorten thought there were votes in new workchoices style policies, then he would go for it. As for the LNP, there are many good people there eg Warren Entsch, but the troglodytes still rule. Shameful.

 

It won't be put to a referendum. A referendum is only needed to make changes to the constitution. The Commonwealth has the power under s51 to legislate with regard to marriage.

What the Coalition is suggesting is a plebiscite, a different beast to a referendum and basically a waste of time, money and resources.

Menzies stated: "We took the name 'Liberal' because we were determined to be a progressive party, willing to make experiments, in no sense reactionary but believing in the individual, his rights, and his enterprise, and rejecting the socialist panacea."

The Liberal party is NOT a conservative party.

As a former political staffer who worked for Liberal MPs I can confirm to the OP that not all Coalition MPs are opposed to marriage equality. Particularly those who still subscribe and keep faith with Menzies vision for the party.

 

Anyone thought about what might happen if the bill does get introduced for a vote? The LNP back bench are allowed to vote either way but 2/3rds apparently don't support. The front bench is bound to oppose but 6 support and some have threatened to cross the floor. TA has threatened to sack any minister that crosses the floor, which would throw the government into (more?) disarray if he follows through. Still, it seems they won't muster up too much support.

On the other side, the Greens would likely vote to support out of principle. ALP members will be in a quandary. Some don't support anyway, so will vote against. Those that do support will have to consider if they want to risk the Abbott government passing a marriage equality bill when the Gillard government could not. Interesting times indeed.

Has anyone speculated on the number if it went to a vote, which is looking unlikely at this point?

 

Katy Faust, raised up by same sex parents and blogger of 'Ask the Bigot' was just interviewed on Lateline.

Her point is children have rights also. Her point is that a couple has a right to enjoy whatever relationship it has, but it is doing harm to impose on children, to deprive them the choice of a real father. Just a thought.

 

Gay couples can and do, already have children. SSM wont change that.

children of heterosexual relationships aren't guaranteed a father either.

Wheres the evidence that having same sex parents is harmful?

 

These days having children has nothing to do with marriage? In terms of children being "deprived" of a real father, here is my response:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/father-daughter-drown-rescued-male-6226135

At least he wasn't same sex attracted.

 

Don't ask for evidence! We don't want to turn this into a debate about parenthood. Marriage equality and child raising are two distinct issues. To relate them to each other is really wrong.

 

I'm sure more than one person on here was damaged by a "normal" upbringing.

I'm sure more than one person on here is a single parent.

What about divorce. Should we outlaw that? Sex before marriage? Ban that too while we are at it.

Edit I see we have moved on from it will make churches exempt from discrimination to "think of the children". Next up people marrying animals or polygamy.

 

One comedian said...let's ban gay divorce, then we'll see how much they really do want to get married.

 

Cool story bro but this is entirely irrelevant as gay couples can already have kids.

Feel free to share something that adds to the disxussion though

"Doing harm" "impose" "deprive"

Absolute nonsense argument by this idiot whoever she or her parents are

 

Anyway we all know those arguments are where the true simpletons in society are well and truly clutching at straws.

 

Plenty of information on her blogg about herself and about the issue that has just played out in the US.