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.

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,216
Reaction score
19,737
As I said. I found it funny and I understand the point of it and have no issue with it attacking Pell and Abbott with the outfits. The problem is the sexual nature of it.

Nudity is fine. The nude statues in Greece and Rome are artistic and tasteful. This was deliberate sexual beyond that which little children should be exposed to without their parents being able censor it themselves.

Do the same artwork without one guy jerking off the other and I'll call for it to get a heritage listing.
Some of those vases from ancient greece/rome depict sexual actions.

I can definitely see the concern parents would have if their kids saw it, however an innocent kid without knowledge of such things would probably not notice it. I'd think parents have enough tools at their disposal to answer inquisitive young minds, whether that be sitting down and explaining it or just brushing it off.

In any case it seems like there are group of Christians who've taken it as a personal attack against their religion, when it isnt. And then there's the George Michael mural as well, it has absolutely nothing to do with Christianity and yet the same group have claimed victim status. But looking at the guy who painted over the George Michael mural I'd understand that these concepts would be way over his head.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,040
Reaction score
29,418
Some of those vases from ancient greece/rome depict sexual actions.

I can definitely see the concern parents would have if their kids saw it, however an innocent kid without knowledge of such things would probably not notice it. I'd think parents have enough tools at their disposal to answer inquisitive young minds, whether that be sitting down and explaining it or just brushing it off.

In any case it seems like there are group of Christians who've taken it as a personal attack against their religion, when it isnt. And then there's the George Michael mural as well, it has absolutely nothing to do with Christianity and yet the same group have claimed victim status. But looking at the guy who painted over the George Michael mural I'd understand that these concepts would be way over his head.
The George Michael one is great. Oddly enough they seemed to find it more offensive than the Pell/Abbott one.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
Again this painting did not have Christianity in its sights, it had Tony Abbott and George Pell in its sights.
It’s interesting, I’ve never seen these inner city types put up ‘artwork’ about Islam or (for example) previous Australian mufti’s calling women pieces of meat etc. are these hipsters scared of Islam, or just totally unbalanced in their views towards Christianity.

I might be a sceptic but I’d suggest that an inner city lefty putting up insulting artwork about Islam simply doesn’t fit a narrative.
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,216
Reaction score
19,737
It’s interesting, I’ve never seen these inner city types put up ‘artwork’ about Islam or (for example) previous Australian mufti’s calling women pieces of meat etc. are these hipsters scared of Islam, or just totally unbalanced in their views towards Christianity.

I might be a sceptic but I’d suggest that an inner city lefty putting up insulting artwork about Islam simply doesn’t fit a narrative.
Take ownership Britt.

You're like those so called "patriots" who complain about Muslims throwing homosexuals off roof tops in the middle East but then partake in the same bigotry against homosexuals.

The FACT is that Abbott and Pell are on record for saying countless bigoted comments about homosexuals, whether it be on mainstream news (tv or print) or in their professional lives.

There isn't a single Muslim in Australia you could bring up that has the same air time as Pell or abbott.

Own your shit
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
If anyone was worried about gay rights in Australia, they should be worried ten times more about Islam than Christianity. I know that’s not the politically correct thing to say, but it’s accurate.

I have no issues with ppl calling out wrongs of the Christian denominations, but it would be good to see some balance.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
Take ownership Britt.

You're like those so called "patriots" who complain about Muslims throwing homosexuals off roof tops in the middle East but then partake in the same bigotry against homosexuals.

The FACT is that Abbott and Pell are on record for saying countless bigoted comments about homosexuals, whether it be on mainstream news (tv or print) or in their professional lives.

There isn't a single Muslim in Australia you could bring up that has the same air time as Pell or abbott.

Own your shit
I think the other point that drives the unbalanced views and reporting is that no one gets labelled racist or bigoted for attacking Christianity. Not quite the same for criticisms of Islam.
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,216
Reaction score
19,737
If anyone was worried about gay rights in Australia, they should be worried ten times more about Islam than Christianity. I know that’s not the politically correct thing to say, but it’s accurate.

I have no issues with ppl calling out wrongs of the Christian denominations, but it would be good to see some balance.
I just said they throw homosexuals off roof tops in the middle East, Which part of that makes you think Christianity is copping all the heat?

Saudi Arabia is well know for a whole plethora of violation of human rights, have you got your head buried in the sand?

And meanwhile Patterson's proposed bill was written by the ACL. In this country there's a bigger threat to homosexuals from extremist christians

I think the other point that drives the unbalanced views and reporting is that no one gets labelled racist or bigoted for attacking Christianity. Not quite the same for criticisms of Islam.
No. I don't want to get into a whole religious debate but the fact is innocent Muslims, who most likely have a different interpretation of Islam ( look it up Britt there are heaps of different sects, even some who completely ignore the violent verses in the quran), are labelled terrorits simply because they follow a strand of Islam.

You're being a victim.
 

Flanagun

Banned
In the Sin Bin
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
22,588
Reaction score
20,580
If anyone was worried about gay rights in Australia, they should be worried ten times more about Islam than Christianity. I know that’s not the politically correct thing to say, but it’s accurate.

I have no issues with ppl calling out wrongs of the Christian denominations, but it would be good to see some balance.
Why do you think it’s accurate? What real evidence do you have to suggest Islamic ideologies reflect the mainstream here? Or will in future?

People focus on people who use Christianity to support disingenuous goals because they believe that so called Christian conservatives control the power base here and are the biggest threat to our society. Conservative Christian ideologues hold more influence over the media and more sway over public policy. It’s also predominantly Christian conservatives who have driven this process, although their position does seem to have generated strong support from the Islamic community. It is not the Islamic community who held the power to push for this in the first place.

Any lobby group has some sort of influence in this day and age, but to suggest any minority lobby group wields more power than the people who actually drive and direct national policies and ideological narratives is a little naive, imo. Islamic lobby groups would have little influence in our society if not for the politicians they lobby and the advocates who support them.
 
Last edited:

Wahesh

The Forefather of The Kennel
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
24,798
Reaction score
12,079
I was hoping for religious freedoms, and it looks like we're going to get that and then some... more than I was expecting. As long as we can celebrate our religion in peace, as long as Christians have the right to refuse service to gay people who troll them (yes it's happened) then I am contempt with what we have. My religion and Church will be immune to the requests of the gay people, and so will other religions and places of worship.

As far as gay people go, I do not hate them, I do not have anything against them, and I wish they would simply accept that there are people who are against this, and there will ALWAYS be people against this, and that includes the majority of the 2,200,000,000 Christians in this world, and let's not forget all the Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, Hindu's and all other religious organisations that do not recognise homosexuality.
 

CaptainJackson

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
16,216
Reaction score
19,737
I was hoping for religious freedoms, and it looks like we're going to get that and then some... more than I was expecting. As long as we can celebrate our religion in peace, as long as Christians have the right to refuse service to gay people who troll them (yes it's happened) then I am contempt with what we have. My religion and Church will be immune to the requests of the gay people, and so will other religions and places of worship.
So when people are served at a commercial business by a Christian, do they have the right to ask them if:-

  • they are gay
  • they are muslim
  • they are atheist
  • they eat shellfish during fasting
  • they eat meat during fasting
  • they have idols at home
  • etc etc
and then refuse service accordingly?

Should other commercial business entities also have the right to refuse service to a Christian purely because they are christian? I mean if I had a business, I'd like to refuse service to extremist christians and make it known there type are not welcome at my business. Would you agree with that?

I don't think you've thought this through, because believe you me there would be a massive backlash at people of your religion.

As far as gay people go, I do not hate them, I do not have anything against them, and I wish they would simply accept that there are people who are against this, and there will ALWAYS be people against this, and that includes the majority of the 2,200,000,000 Christians in this world, and let's not forget all the Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, Hindu's and all other religious organisations that do not recognise homosexuality.
If you GENUINELY had nothing against them you would live and let live and let your god judge them
 

Wahesh

The Forefather of The Kennel
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
24,798
Reaction score
12,079
So when people are served at a commercial business by a Christian, do they have the right to ask them if:-

  • they are gay
  • they are muslim
  • they are atheist
  • they eat shellfish during fasting
  • they eat meat during fasting
  • they have idols at home
  • etc etc
and then refuse service accordingly?

Should other commercial business entities also have the right to refuse service to a Christian purely because they are christian? I mean if I had a business, I'd like to refuse service to extremist christians and make it known there type are not welcome at my business. Would you agree with that?

I don't think you've thought this through, because believe you me there would be a massive backlash at people of your religion.
This issue at hand is gay people who are trolling Christians, not the other things you listed. There was a troll who baited a Catholic beauty therapist in Perth who wanted her to treat him and his future husband before their wedding. All the gay things were listed in the request (it was on Facebook). This guy knew she was a Catholic and she said that she's had gay clients in the past and has no problem with them, nor should she because they just go there for their own business, but this guy who was baiting her obviously looking to stir her up a little can be refused service and it will have no ramifications on her.


If you GENUINELY had nothing against them you would live and let live and let your god judge them
Agreed - I do not have anything against them, and if they would stop offending Christians with their paintings and stop attacking us because of our beliefs, then there wouldn't be a problem. All the violence and tension that's happening right now isn't because of the survey, it's because of the yes people provoking those who disagree with them.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,040
Reaction score
29,418
This issue at hand is gay people who are trolling Christians, not the other things you listed. There was a troll who baited a Catholic beauty therapist in Perth who wanted her to treat him and his future husband before their wedding. All the gay things were listed in the request (it was on Facebook). This guy knew she was a Catholic and she said that she's had gay clients in the past and has no problem with them, nor should she because they just go there for their own business, but this guy who was baiting her obviously looking to stir her up a little can be refused service and it will have no ramifications on her.
She would be able to block that based on harassment laws. It's considered cyber bullying and she can refuse service based on that and also demand compensation from the client.
 

Wahesh

The Forefather of The Kennel
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
24,798
Reaction score
12,079
She would be able to block that based on harassment laws. It's considered cyber bullying and she can refuse service based on that and also demand compensation from the client.
I think you're right but at the same time in Australia you can sue a business for refusal of service - it means the water is muddy as both parties are guilty of something. Adding this clause to the bill will make it a little more clear.
 

CroydonDog

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
19,539
Reaction score
16,538
Wait, what?

Anti-LGBT politician resigns after being 'caught having sex with man in his office'
Wes Goodman resigns for 'inappropriate conduct'

  • Maya Oppenheim
  • @mayaoppenheim

  • An Ohio lawmaker who routinely touted his Christian faith and anti-LGBT views has resigned after being caught having sex with a man in his office.

Wes Goodman, who is the Republican state legislator for Ohio, is married to a woman who is assistant director of an annual anti-abortion rally known as March for Life.

The right-wing legislator, who pushed “family values”, was reportedly witnessed having sex with a man inside his office who was not employed by the legislator.

According to the Columbus Dispatch, the observer told Ohio House Chief of Staff Mike Dittoe what had happened on Tuesday afternoon. Mr Dittoe responded by telling House Speaker Republican Cliff Rosenberger who in turn met with Mr Goodman.

The 33-year-old, who has been branded the “conscience of the conservative movement”, resigned for “inappropriate conduct” shortly after the meeting took place.

Mr Goodman, whose Twitter biography describes him as “Christian. American. Conservative. Republican. Husband to @Beth1027”, has regularly claimed "natural marriage" occurs between a man and a woman.

"Healthy, vibrant, thriving, values-driven families are the source of Ohio's proud history and the key to Ohio's future greatness,” reads his campaign website which has now been taken offline.

The lawmaker acknowledged he was stepping down in a statement. “We all bring our own struggles and our own trials into public life," he said.

"That has been true for me, and I sincerely regret that my actions and choices have kept me from serving my constituents and our state in a way that reflects the best ideals of public service," he continued. "For those whom I have let down, I’m sorry. As I move onto the next chapter of my life, I sincerely ask for privacy for myself, my family, and my friends.”

“I was alerted to details yesterday afternoon regarding his involvement in inappropriate behaviour related to his state office,” Mr Rosenberger said in a statement. “I met with him later in the day where he acknowledged and confirmed the allegations. It became clear that his resignation was the most appropriate course of action for him, his family, the constituents of the 87th House District and this institution.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,040
Reaction score
29,418
I think you're right but at the same time in Australia you can sue a business for refusal of service - it means the water is muddy as both parties are guilty of something. Adding this clause to the bill will make it a little more clear.
Kind of. It's a bit more complex than that. You can't refuse service on discrimination grounds. That's currently the case for race, sexual orientation, etc. So it's not really related to the gay marriage thing as a person couldn't refuse service right now so nothing would change in the future.

What it really comes down to is if you consider the anti-discrimination laws to be vital. If we do make amendments to the laws then it should be an all or nothing approach. All people should be able to discriminate or no one should. There are obvious exceptions when it comes to religion. The christian religion is against gay marriage so religious should be able to avoid marrying a gay couple but when you take a few steps away from the marriage then it's no longer a religious thing. For example, a person baking a cake for a gay wedding isn't directly helping the couple get married and there's no part in the bible where it says "you can't bake a cake for gays"

I do agree that something definitive should be written regarding the bullying legislation and this has actually been in the works for a long time. New legislative bills are being developed to prevent people from trolling individuals or companies to prevent this exact issue. This isn't part of gay marriage though and will have nothing to do with the gay marriage bill. It's a completely separate bill. They have to be cautious on the legislation as well. If the wording isn't right then people will end up being charged based on misunderstandings.

The current anti-bullying bill will likely be used as a base point. It requires proof that the individual deliberately and repetitively bullied the company or individual.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,040
Reaction score
29,418
Wait, what?

Anti-LGBT politician resigns after being 'caught having sex with man in his office'
Wes Goodman resigns for 'inappropriate conduct'

  • Maya Oppenheim
  • @mayaoppenheim

  • An Ohio lawmaker who routinely touted his Christian faith and anti-LGBT views has resigned after being caught having sex with a man in his office.

Wes Goodman, who is the Republican state legislator for Ohio, is married to a woman who is assistant director of an annual anti-abortion rally known as March for Life.

The right-wing legislator, who pushed “family values”, was reportedly witnessed having sex with a man inside his office who was not employed by the legislator.

According to the Columbus Dispatch, the observer told Ohio House Chief of Staff Mike Dittoe what had happened on Tuesday afternoon. Mr Dittoe responded by telling House Speaker Republican Cliff Rosenberger who in turn met with Mr Goodman.

The 33-year-old, who has been branded the “conscience of the conservative movement”, resigned for “inappropriate conduct” shortly after the meeting took place.

Mr Goodman, whose Twitter biography describes him as “Christian. American. Conservative. Republican. Husband to @Beth1027”, has regularly claimed "natural marriage" occurs between a man and a woman.

"Healthy, vibrant, thriving, values-driven families are the source of Ohio's proud history and the key to Ohio's future greatness,” reads his campaign website which has now been taken offline.

The lawmaker acknowledged he was stepping down in a statement. “We all bring our own struggles and our own trials into public life," he said.

"That has been true for me, and I sincerely regret that my actions and choices have kept me from serving my constituents and our state in a way that reflects the best ideals of public service," he continued. "For those whom I have let down, I’m sorry. As I move onto the next chapter of my life, I sincerely ask for privacy for myself, my family, and my friends.”

“I was alerted to details yesterday afternoon regarding his involvement in inappropriate behaviour related to his state office,” Mr Rosenberger said in a statement. “I met with him later in the day where he acknowledged and confirmed the allegations. It became clear that his resignation was the most appropriate course of action for him, his family, the constituents of the 87th House District and this institution.
There has been many similar cases as this. It's a psychological phenomenon where people go after their own issues as much as those who hate the issues. There was several case studies where people who very publicly campaigned against rape were found to have committed rape multiple times. It's something to do with an absolute determination to oppress their true nature by imposing harsher penalties on those with similar afflictions.
 

CroydonDog

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
19,539
Reaction score
16,538
Kind of. It's a bit more complex than that. You can't refuse service on discrimination grounds. That's currently the case for race, sexual orientation, etc. So it's not really related to the gay marriage thing as a person couldn't refuse service right now so nothing would change in the future.

What it really comes down to is if you consider the anti-discrimination laws to be vital. If we do make amendments to the laws then it should be an all or nothing approach. All people should be able to discriminate or no one should. There are obvious exceptions when it comes to religion. The christian religion is against gay marriage so religious should be able to avoid marrying a gay couple but when you take a few steps away from the marriage then it's no longer a religious thing. For example, a person baking a cake for a gay wedding isn't directly helping the couple get married and there's no part in the bible where it says "you can't bake a cake for gays"

I do agree that something definitive should be written regarding the bullying legislation and this has actually been in the works for a long time. New legislative bills are being developed to prevent people from trolling individuals or companies to prevent this exact issue. This isn't part of gay marriage though and will have nothing to do with the gay marriage bill. It's a completely separate bill. They have to be cautious on the legislation as well. If the wording isn't right then people will end up being charged based on misunderstandings.

The current anti-bullying bill will likely be used as a base point. It requires proof that the individual deliberately and repetitively bullied the company or individual.
Yes. This.

I also would add that freedom of religion is a separate issue from the SSM debate. There is already religious freedom in place, and strengthening or weakening these laws should not be bundled it with the marriage act change.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top