Gay marriage plebiscite - Result YES to SSM

Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Not Voting


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.

JayBee

Kennel Legend
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
10,791
Reaction score
4,027
That's where the technicality may lie, though also in her post she mentioned that her clientele included homosexuals and that she couldn't have prejudices against her clientele.

So then it falls down to the technicality of the law. Very easily it can be found as for the business owner, based on past legal findings of businesses dismissing staff/contractors for views that were associated with the business, but also it can be found in favour of the contractor if she wasn't given a chance to rectify it.
Agreed - not completely black and white.

Multiple sources have stipulated that it was not the first conversation they have had with her. Which is fair enough - she stuck to her convictions it and cost her a job. Having said that, as you mentioned, it comes down to the technical aspect of the law.

Some may see it as unfair, others see it as fair. Just like some people think the Lukaku song is racist, whilst others thing it isnt.
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
20,580
Agreed - not completely black and white.

Multiple sources have stipulated that it was not the first conversation they have had with her. Which is fair enough - she stuck to her convictions it and cost her a job. Having said that, as you mentioned, it comes down to the technical aspect of the law.

Some may see it as unfair, others see it as fair. Just like some people think the Lukaku song is racist, whilst others thing it isnt.
I'm not interested in people's opinions though. There's been enough evidence in this thread that certain people are hypocrites and base their views solely on their own beliefs with complete ignorance of the law and a complete willingness to say screw the law.

This is a legal dilemma and doesn't need morons like Andrew Bolt adding their biased bullshit perspective.

The contractor is well within her rights to take this further to a court of law (everyone is if they think they've been unfairly dismissed), and the law will make a decision based not on their personal beliefs, not on which side Yes/No is right and just, but solely based on the law.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
It's become ridiculous, the number of organisations, sporting clubs and companies, who are crawling over each other to see who is the most fashionable SSM supporter.

There are companies that have put up huge rainbow decorations and signage throughout offices.

This is bullying in the extreme. In some of these work places, possibly half (or more) of the staff will vote No.

Same with the GayAFL - changing their logo to YES.

Bunch of politically correct fkwits.
 

JayBee

Kennel Legend
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
10,791
Reaction score
4,027
It's become ridiculous, the number of organisations, sporting clubs and companies, who are crawling over each other to see who is the most fashionable SSM supporter.

There are companies that have put up huge rainbow decorations and signage throughout offices.

This is bullying in the extreme. In some of these work places, possibly half (or more) of the staff will vote No.

Same with the GayAFL - changing their logo to YES.

Bunch of politically correct fkwits.
Thank you!

How better to alienate your staff than to put up a divisive political belief.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
I take no issue with any individual using their democratic right to vote Yes or to vote No.

I take huge exception when organisations use their position to take political stances that are not supported by their entire work force.

Even the Australian Medical Association issued a public statement supporting SSM. Who is the head of the AMA? Oh I don't know, a huge SSM advocate and publicly declared lesbian.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...e/news-story/ad30aaab46c4e97472fa7d7523a09f34

Or the NSW Law Society issuing a public statement which potentially misrepresents the views of many of it's lawyers who DO NOT support SSM.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...e/news-story/acb44cd29bf8276badb30f219ed0eda9
 
Last edited:

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
Bit of a difference between the two. Michael Koziol is an actual reporter. Bolt isn't. He's a blogger.
Personally I don't care how anyone defines a journalist v blogger. I care about how factual they are.

Given that organisations full of "journalists" like the ABC are almost entirely 100% biased to left wing issues (despite it being a public organisation that promises to maintain balance), I don't particularly care what label is put on anyone.
 

DoggiesBoy

Kennel Enthusiast
Gilded
Joined
Sep 7, 2015
Messages
3,729
Reaction score
1,809
It's become ridiculous, the number of organisations, sporting clubs and companies, who are crawling over each other to see who is the most fashionable SSM supporter.

There are companies that have put up huge rainbow decorations and signage throughout offices.

This is bullying in the extreme. In some of these work places, possibly half (or more) of the staff will vote No.

Same with the GayAFL - changing their logo to YES.

Bunch of politically correct fkwits.
So anyone that has a different political view than you is a fuckwit?
 

CroydonDog

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
19,611
Reaction score
16,690
It's become ridiculous, the number of organisations, sporting clubs and companies, who are crawling over each other to see who is the most fashionable SSM supporter.

There are companies that have put up huge rainbow decorations and signage throughout offices.

This is bullying in the extreme. In some of these work places, possibly half (or more) of the staff will vote No.

Same with the GayAFL - changing their logo to YES.

Bunch of politically correct fkwits.
Bullying in the extreme? For putting up a rainbow logo?

If you think that is bullying, you have clearly never been bullied.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
So anyone that has a different political view than you is a fuckwit?
No.

Any organisation that pretends to represent EVERY SINGLE ONE of it's members political views, when in reality half of it's members completely disagree with it's stance is just wrong.

Can I point out that I would have the same opinion of any organisation that came out and publicly declared people should vote NO.

Isn't it funny though. Somehow there just doesn't seem to be any major corporations coming out and supporting the no campaign.

I wonder why? Maybe our major corporations are just at the cutting edge of social issues?

LOL - or maybe it's because these organisations know what is good for them, and publicly supporting No would not be a good thing for them. Hello gay activitists.
 

CroydonDog

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
19,611
Reaction score
16,690
Ladies and gentlemen, one of the poster children for the No campaign, Cory Bernardi...

Craigburn Primary School’s ‘wear a dress’ fundraiser blasted by Senator Cory Bernardi, but comments hike donations
UPDATE: AN Adelaide primary school’s “wear a dress day” has been labelled absurd by Senator Cory Bernardi — but his comments backfired, pushing the fundraiser far above its $900 goal.

Matt Smith
The AdvertiserSEPTEMBER 21, 201710:11AM




Follow
Cory Bernardi

✔@corybernardi

One school in SA now has 'wear a dress day'. This gender morphing is really getting absurd#auspolhttp://blogs.craigburn.sa.edu.au/blog/2017/09/19/doing-it-in-a-dress-casual-day-fundraiser/ …

5:07 PM - Sep 20, 2017


Polldaddy.com
The leader of the Australian Conservatives and a vocal supporter of traditional marriage has questioned the timing of the fundraiser.

South Australia’s Education Minister Susan Close defended the decision, saying the student-led fundraiser had nothing to do with the debate about marriage equality.

Senator Bernardi this morning said it was “entirely inappropriate” and “bordering on the absurb”.

He told The Advertiser he did not understand why the tradition of casual dress day had suddenly become “wear a dress to school day”.

“In the midst of a debate about the safe school gender ideology program, the redefinition of marriage and attempts to de-genderise society it seems this school is playing into a political cause rather than an educational one,” Senator Bernardi said.



Cory Bernardi speaks at the Coalition for Marriage’s anti-same-sex marriage campaign event in Adelaide on Tuesday. Picture: AAP/Matt LoxtonSource:News Corp Australia

“Why are we suddenly encouraging boys and male teachers to wear a dress?”

Senator Bernardi’s comments have driven people to pledge money to the fundraiser, with prominent gay ABC comedian Josh Thomas tweeting his support and a link to the fundraising page.

The original goal was $900, but at 11.30pm SA time, it was more than $16,000, and by 8.30am this morning it more than $20,000.

Thomas confirmed to The Advertiser he’d donated $2000.

Parents of children at the school have taken to social media to back the fundraiser.

Writing on the Craigburn Connections blog, Rob Walker said:

“Great way to have a bit of fun while raising awareness & funds for African kids!

(from a former School Councillor & dad of 3 Craigburn kids!)”

And Mark Sansome agreed: “What an amazing lesson for the kids! The power of social media wins and a great fundraising effort. Well done Craigburn, so proud of my kids school.”

Nicola Cornish wrote: What a fantastic charity and a great opportunity for our children to learn about those less fortunate than themselves. Must admit I am looking forward to seeing the dresses!!”

Ms Close said Senator Bernardi’s comments were ridiculous and incorrect.

“Craigburn Primary School is raising money to help girls in Africa have access to education,” Ms Close said.

“The funds will go towards books and other resources.

“This is a student-led initiative and is completely unrelated to the current marriage equality debate.

“Senator Bernardi should check his facts before incorrectly naming and shaming a school undertaking charity work.”



A school blog post promoting the fundraiser was deleted shortly after The Advertisercontacted the Education Department late Wednesday afternoon, but was put back up online later in the evening.

The blog post said for a gold coin donation all the staff and students will be wearing a dress to school. “Of course, it you don’t feel comfortable wearing a dress you can just come in casual clothes,” the post said.

“The main thing to focus on is raising as much money as possible.”

Craigburn Primary caters for 500 students, mainly from Flagstaff Hill, Aberfoyle Park and Coromandel Valley, in Reception to year 7.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
Is that not what quite a few religious organisations are doing too?
Religious organisations make it very clear when you become an employee that there are particular rules and expectations.

Banks like CBA and ANZ do not.

If you gave me an example of a commercial organisation that has come out supporting the no campaign then I would absolutely call them out for the same exception I take with companies supporting the yes campaign
 

Flanagun

Banned
In the Sin Bin
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
22,588
Reaction score
20,581
It's become ridiculous, the number of organisations, sporting clubs and companies, who are crawling over each other to see who is the most fashionable SSM supporter.

There are companies that have put up huge rainbow decorations and signage throughout offices.

This is bullying in the extreme. In some of these work places, possibly half (or more) of the staff will vote No.

Same with the GayAFL - changing their logo to YES.

Bunch of politically correct fkwits.
You need to learn the definition of bullying. A company putting up a bunch of yes signs that reflect its management's views is NOT bullying in any way, shape or form.......Managers and companies supporting the yes vote is not bullying anymore than a private citizen using a profile pic filter that says it's Ok to say no is. You think they should have less freedom to state their views than someone with less influence? Bullying in the extreme? Give me a break. These companies are just exercising the same right to free speech the no side keeps harping on about.

If you don't like the company's stance, don't support the company. I'd certainly never personally have considered buying Barilla pasta after the CEO came out with a bunch of comments I strongly object to a few years ago (I understand the company has lifted its game a little since those comments were made) ......I wouldn't bother throwing a tantrum about perceived bullying from the company though. It's their right to take a stance on an issue and their customer's rights to respond according to their consciences.
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
20,580
Is that not what quite a few religious organisations are doing too?
The funny thing is that in council elections corporations are given a vote because they pay taxes and contribute to the local council.

Guess which organisations claim a charity status hence tax exempt, therefore have to stay out of political campaigns?

But yes how dare these hypocritical corporations WHO PAY TAXES pick a side
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
The funny thing is that in council elections corporations are given a vote because they pay taxes and contribute to the local council.

Guess which organisations claim a charity status hence tax exempt, therefore have to stay out of political campaigns?

But yes how dare these hypocritical corporations WHO PAY TAXES pick a side
So what is a hypothetical senior manager in a big bank supposed to do if they support the no campaign?

I guarantee you they won't be able to make a single truthful comment over the next two months.

Bullied into silence.
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
20,580
So what is a hypothetical senior manager in a big bank supposed to do if they support the no campaign?

I guarantee you they won't be able to make a single truthful comment over the next two months.

Bullied into silence.
Make it clear that your views do not reflect the company you work for, or never link yourself to them in the first place AND THEN MAKE YOUR VIEW!!!

Too hard for you to comprehend?
 

DoggiesBoy

Kennel Enthusiast
Gilded
Joined
Sep 7, 2015
Messages
3,729
Reaction score
1,809
Religious organisations make it very clear when you become an employee that there are particular rules and expectations.

Banks like CBA and ANZ do not.

If you gave me an example of a commercial organisation that has come out supporting the no campaign then I would absolutely call them out for the same exception I take with companies supporting the yes campaign
See the line is very blurred and this was what i was trying to get at last night. For example the Catholic church i think employs like 180,000 people and they are against SSM (totally within their right i must add). The Seventh-day Adventist Church owns and operates a commercial brand (Sanitarium) as a charity, not sure how many they employ, that organisation is also against SSM. I'm sure there are more examples i am missing here. So these institutions by operating in the corporate world and making money are really blurring the line and they operate under completely different laws.
 

Flanagun

Banned
In the Sin Bin
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
22,588
Reaction score
20,581
So what is a hypothetical senior manager in a big bank supposed to do if they support the no campaign?

I guarantee you they won't be able to make a single truthful comment over the next two months.

Bullied into silence.
Maybe the manager should just get on with his job.....which is managing a bank, not political campaigning. If he expressed his view as a private citizen and did lose his job, I'm sure he'd be entitled to a day in court. Unless that were to happen, there really wouldn't be a problem and if it became a problem there would be potential avenues of recourse. Business owners and CEOs can take any stance they like on this issue just as private citizens can. This is a total non issue. Find something legit to complain about.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,177
Reaction score
29,716
It's become ridiculous, the number of organisations, sporting clubs and companies, who are crawling over each other to see who is the most fashionable SSM supporter.

There are companies that have put up huge rainbow decorations and signage throughout offices.

This is bullying in the extreme. In some of these work places, possibly half (or more) of the staff will vote No.

Same with the GayAFL - changing their logo to YES.

Bunch of politically correct fkwits.
It's a bunch of companies doing what they want. On the Today show this morning they were talking about how several sporting clubs were publicly supporting the No vote. The host said something along the lines of "But they're not churches, they're sporting clubs, should they be allowed to do this" and the interviewee said "of course they should. They're just posting their opinion for the world to see and everyone is allowed to do that"

That's all it comes down to. Businesses, sporting associations, whatever, they can do what they want. If they want to paint their offices with rainbows and unicorns, they can do that if they want. If they want to post big "Vote No" signs all over their offices then they can do that too. It doesn't make them politically correct fuckwits, it makes them businesses using their right to free speech to advertise what they want.

The staff at the companies have no legal rights to be protected from the scary rainbows.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top