AusCelebs Forums

View active topics It is currently Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:33 am



Reply to topic 
 [ 72 posts ] 
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next
 Same sex marriage vote 

Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?
Yes 69%  69%  [ 117 ]
No 31%  31%  [ 53 ]
Total votes : 170

 Same sex marriage vote 
Message Author

Postby wolverine » Wed Sep 20, 2017 12:41 am


Everybody I speak to has an opinion on the same sex marriage question currently gripping the country. phunkyfeelone started the debate so here is everyone's opportunity to vote, contribute etc. Speak freely, it will be interesting to see what everyone thinks having the benefit of anonymity that forums and the Internet provide.

Go forth and vote!


3
Capo Bastone
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2002 7:26 am
Posts: 2707
Karma: 241.60 (6540 thanks)
Wed Sep 20, 2017 12:41 am
Profile

Postby phunkyfeelone » Wed Sep 20, 2017 12:43 am


Obviously a hot topic nationally at the moment, but wondering if a mod could put up an anonymous poll to see which way AC members are voting?

Regardless of how you intend to vote, keep any discussion civil and don't use any of the buzz words like bigot, homophobe, etc.

Personal opinion only:
- I think marriage is between a man and a woman, and should stay that way.
- I'm not religious AT ALL (i'm an aethiest to the core)
- I have gay friends, I have polyamorous friends (a guy in a relationship with 2 women), I don't discriminate, I don't judge.
- The 'yes' camp are FAR more aggressive in their commentary, and quite frankly are disgraceful
- The news and advertising outlets are embarrassing, clearly favouring one side to push an agenda
- The 'no' camp have not used 'anti-gay' terminology, only to keep the act and definition the same.
- Despite all the public rhetoric, legal marriage is not some love story - it's a legally binding agreement.
- The advertising focuses on "love is love" - fact is, the Marriage Act is referenced in 26 pieces of legislation, all of which must be reassessed and changed to suit what is a minority group.
- I don't like the term 'Marriage Equality' - everyone currently has the right to be married - any man can marry a woman, any woman can marry a man - so the law is equal.
- Despite what the 'Yes' camp would have you believe, legislation in other countries is not clear cut - The Netherlands, which is seen to be the poster child of same-sex marriage, still maintains legal differences between heterosexual and homosexual couples, mainly when it comes to custody.
- At the end of the day, the last election was run and won (I didn't vote for LNP), but I respect the result of the election, and if this is such a big topic to you, vote Labour or Green next time
- $122m is a waste of money on this - we have elections for this kind of thing...


3
Ned Flanders
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 1:59 pm
Posts: 2077
Karma: 164.08 (3408 thanks)

Location: The Land of Chocolate
Wed Sep 20, 2017 12:43 am
Profile

Postby thebatdude » Wed Sep 20, 2017 10:16 am


NO one has the rights to tell anyone else who they can make a loving commitment to or what they’re allowed to do with their private parts. It’s simply a case of their own business and that of the person they’re doing it to. There’s nothing to debate.

If you’re offended by another person’s choice then try and remember these words of wisdom my father passed down to me: “Never forget what happens to everyone else when you’re offended. Nothing”.

Vote YES


6
Selma Bouvier

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 1:19 pm
Posts: 42
Karma: 140.48 (59 thanks)
Wed Sep 20, 2017 10:16 am
Profile

Postby Some Bloke » Wed Sep 20, 2017 10:25 am


My belief is that marriage is a flawed concept and should be banned entirely.
If any other product had the failure rate of marriage it would be recalled.
The CSIRO would make better use of that $122,000,000.

Besides all that, it's a yes from me. Two consenting adults should be able to marry each other.


6
Todd Flanders
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 7:02 pm
Posts: 348
Karma: 566.09 (1970 thanks)
Wed Sep 20, 2017 10:25 am
Profile

Postby gonzo » Wed Sep 20, 2017 5:24 pm


couldn't care less..as long as they don't bugger me !! :P


3
Todd Flanders

Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 3:07 pm
Posts: 268
Karma: 42.32 (113 thanks)
Wed Sep 20, 2017 5:24 pm
Profile

Postby HIPPYD » Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:06 pm


Funny how the religious point to the bible for their reason against, yet the bible also says gays should be killed...they don't seem to mention that part. In any event, marriage has nothing to do with religion despite what they think, it's a legal contract. A wedding in a church is just ceremonial religious garbage which means jack squat until you sign government paper work. Even if gays could never marry there will still always be gay couples with kids living as a family so that in itself defeats their argument. The no camp really has no rational point, they are either ignorant of the issue or fundies.


Jimbo Jones
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 5:52 pm
Posts: 201
Karma: 243.78 (490 thanks)

Location: W.A
Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:06 pm
Profile

Postby phunkyfeelone » Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:50 pm


HIPPYD wrote:
Funny how the religious point to the bible for their reason against, yet the bible also says gays should be killed...they don't seem to mention that part. In any event, marriage has nothing to do with religion despite what they think, it's a legal contract. A wedding in a church is just ceremonial religious garbage which means jack squat until you sign government paper work. Even if gays could never marry there will still always be gay couples with kids living as a family so that in itself defeats their argument. The no camp really has no rational point, they are either ignorant of the issue or fundies.


No rational point - the belief that a valid and complete base for a family consists of a man and woman for physiological reasons is a pretty solid reason.
No religion, no ant-gay bullshit. And it is the natural construct that is consistent across all animal species. The male and female of a species pair off, we have legalised this pairing by way of marriage because of the complicated social structures that exist with humans.

I also think IVF should be a lot more restricted, I personally believe there's only 1 way to have children, which is via a man and a woman having sex.
I find it very selfish and unnatural to make babies in a lab. Particularly for same sex couples, it's not the way humans are designed.

And the classic argument is "there's plenty of shit hetro couples", you're right, if anything I think marriage laws should be tightened, with a minimum 2 year co-habitation requirement, pass legal tests for violence and anti-social behaviours etc.

But under this construct, have civil unions for those in a committed relationship, which provides legal rights to an extent.

I think we all agree that wasting $122m on this is so fcking stupid, we had an election, where two parties had different views on a range of issues. If same-sex marriage is your most important issue, then use your vote to say so. For me, the environment is a much bigger issue, so I cast my vote accordingly, and accept that it may come with a couple of laws that I don't like but have to accept.

Bitching and moaning because shit doesn't go your way only creates a divide, as we currently have.


Ned Flanders
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 1:59 pm
Posts: 2077
Karma: 164.08 (3408 thanks)

Location: The Land of Chocolate
Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:50 pm
Profile

Postby fataussie » Wed Sep 20, 2017 9:31 pm


I don't care as long as it's not made compulsory. :shock:


Maggie's Pacifier

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 9:24 pm
Posts: 1
Karma: none
Wed Sep 20, 2017 9:31 pm
Profile

Postby der Meister » Wed Sep 20, 2017 9:48 pm


2 Gay people getting married tomorrow won't change my life in any way, so it's a YES from me.


4
Judge Roy Snyder
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 6:51 pm
Posts: 924
Karma: 220.67 (2039 thanks)

Location: Victoria
Wed Sep 20, 2017 9:48 pm
Profile WWW

Postby atefooterz » Wed Sep 20, 2017 10:26 pm


So on this no basis, no old folks can get married cos they cannot have children anymore?
My current fave scare is fake stats showing same sex couples kids are likely to be exposed to incest... spread by bible loving single Mums with a revolving door of random live in blokes, that police records show have a very high incidence of "incest" lolz

Is there anyway to set up a global poll that anyone can vote in & it be shared on FB, twitter G+ etc?
( link to this one & reason to login/join to comment)


1
Santa's Little Helper
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 1:34 pm
Posts: 13763
Karma: 166.53 (22919 thanks)

Location: #nowhereman
Wed Sep 20, 2017 10:26 pm
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic 
 [ 72 posts ] 
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software for PTF.
.