Why are we asking if we should say "Yes" or "No"to same sex marriage, it should be "Yes" or "No" to abolish marriage altogether, we would all be the same, with partners, if we so chose.
hako said
08:04 PM Sep 19, 2017
We're all different iana and no way would I want us to be all the same....how boring. Marriage is just a form of commitment that some of us choose to make. Personally I never gave it much thought ...it just happened 51 years ago....no regrets either as I was very very lucky.
Times are changing - but I still cannot refer to my wife as my "partner/pardner" as she is not a cowboy.
Good Luck.
Goldfinger said
08:12 PM Sep 19, 2017
The irony of the current situation: Defacto couples often with little or no commitment, have greater legal rights/social acceptance, than same sex couples who WANT to make a commitment and are denied the right to legal commitment...how bizarre/illogical.......and absolutely nothing to do with Religion..live and let live...Hoo Roo
-- Edited by Goldfinger on Tuesday 19th of September 2017 08:22:44 PM
Aus-Kiwi said
08:20 PM Sep 19, 2017
I'm not guy . But what people do is their business . Concenting adults . They are going to do what they want . Just be happy as far as I'm concerned!! So much BS is said from both sides !!
Phillipn said
08:41 PM Sep 19, 2017
We had Adam and Eve, I don`t think we would have had the same result had it been Adam and Steve.
landy said
10:05 PM Sep 19, 2017
This is why we are having the yes / no vote lets just count the votes and get on with it.
Brownie2 said
12:28 AM Sep 20, 2017
Phillipn,
I sure hope you are joking!
We've just had a great night with our gay mates that we met in 2012, (they've now been together for 41 years). They've been through the ringer in their lives together, but love each other deeply, and are committed! I'm not sure they want to be "married" actually, but their right to do so would be appreciated. Who are we to say that they should not be afforded the same rights as we heterosexual couples who have the right to share our property and chattels with the one we love! "Adam and Steve" what a poor try at dividing us!
Bob
Lancelot Link said
02:07 AM Sep 20, 2017
Before they, the politicians, even asked us the question, there is the question concerning Family Law. The powers to be have not got the existing laws right! So how many millions of dollars is it going to take to get the new proposal right after the event? We are going to have a new dilemma concerning divorce, payments for children and ancillaries! Get the current laws right, then start on new laws to get them right, then ask the question!
The Belmont Bear said
03:14 AM Sep 20, 2017
Best part of being on the other side of the world is that I don't have to listen to the rubbish talk coming from both sides (or for that matter vote in a plebiscite that has little or no meaning). Personally I couldn't care less about the outcome it's really not that high on my list of things that I'd like to see the government working on. May as well just legalise it it's going to happen anyhow as soon as Labour gets back into power.
Izabarack said
06:28 AM Sep 20, 2017
Phillipn wrote:
We had Adam and Eve, ........
Never, ever believed that Fairy Tale, so quite irrelevant to the current discussions in our society.
Pretty simple to allow all citizens equal access to the legal status of marriage. I am most annoyed about the sheer waste of taxpayer's money in a public opinion poll.
Iza
rockylizard said
07:40 AM Sep 20, 2017
Gday...
Johnny Howard did it all by himself without any public consultation ... just added the words "between a man and a woman".
Now they want to spend $122million to 'undo' it ..........................................
Cheers - John
Aus-Kiwi said
07:41 AM Sep 20, 2017
^^ knote wrong ^^
Izabarack said
08:29 AM Sep 20, 2017
Brownie2 wrote:
Phillipn,
"Adam and Steve" what a poor try at dividing us!
There is no need to make denigrating judgments about other person's belief systems underpining quite silly arguments intended to deny all people equality in how they might demonstrate their love and commitment to a partner. One good thing about the current debate is that it has provided ample opportunity to talk to my kids about ethics.
Iza
Ron-D said
09:07 AM Sep 20, 2017
Iam of the believe that marriage is between a man and a woman but times are a changeling and no doubt Iam out of touch and will be ridiculed for my opinion .
iana said
09:22 AM Sep 20, 2017
Henry Fitz Gerald and Gerald Fitz Henry have been wanting to get married for ages.
RustyD said
09:24 AM Sep 20, 2017
Good morning. We want to apply for a marriage license."
"Names?", said the clerk.
"Tim and Jim Jones."
"Jones?? Are you related?? I see a resemblance."
"Yes, we're brothers."
"Brothers?? You can't get married."
"Why not?? Aren't you giving marriage licenses to same gender couples?"
"Yes, thousands. But we haven't had any siblings. That's incest!"
"Incest?" No, we are not gay."
"Not gay?? Then why do you want to get married?"
"For the financial benefits, of course. And we do love each other. Besides, we don't have any other prospects."
"But we're issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples who've claim they'd been denied equal protection under law.
If you are not gay, you can get married to a woman."
"Wait a minute. A gay man has the same right to marry a woman as I have.
But just because I'm straight doesn't mean I want to marry a woman. I want to marry Jim."
"And I want to marry Tim, Are you going to discriminate against us just because we are not gay?"
"All right, all right. I'll give you your license.. Next."
"Hi. We are here to get married."
"Names?"
"John Smith, Jane James, Robert Green, and June Johnson."
"Who wants to marry whom?"
"We all want to marry each other."
"But there are four of you!"
"That's right. You see, we're all bisexual. I love Jane and Robert, Jane loves me and June, June loves Robert and Jane, and Robert loves June and me. All of us getting married together is the only way that we can express our sexual preferences in a marital relationship."
"But we've only been granting licenses to gay and lesbian couples."
"So you're discriminating against bisexuals!"
"No, it's just that, well, the traditional idea of marriage is that it's just for couples."
"Since when are you standing on tradition?"
"Well, I mean, you have to draw the line somewhere."
"Who says?? There's no logical reason to limit marriage to couples. The more the better. Besides, we demand our rights! The mayor says the constitution guarantees equal protection under the law. Give us a marriage license!"
"All right, all right. ..Next."
"Hello, I'd like a marriage license."
"In what names?"
"David Anderson."
"And the other man?"
"That's all. I want to marry myself."
"Marry yourself?? What do you mean?"
"Well, my psychiatrist says I have a dual personality, so I want to marry the two together.
Maybe I can file a joint income-tax return."
"That does it!? I quit!!? You people are making a mockery of marriage!!"
blaze said
10:19 AM Sep 20, 2017
RustyD wrote:
Good morning. We want to apply for a marriage license." "Names?", said the clerk. "Tim and Jim Jones." "Jones?? Are you related?? I see a resemblance." "Yes, we're brothers." "Brothers?? You can't get married." "Why not?? Aren't you giving marriage licenses to same gender couples?" "Yes, thousands. But we haven't had any siblings. That's incest!" "Incest?" No, we are not gay." "Not gay?? Then why do you want to get married?" "For the financial benefits, of course. And we do love each other. Besides, we don't have any other prospects." "But we're issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples who've claim they'd been denied equal protection under law. If you are not gay, you can get married to a woman." "Wait a minute. A gay man has the same right to marry a woman as I have. But just because I'm straight doesn't mean I want to marry a woman. I want to marry Jim." "And I want to marry Tim, Are you going to discriminate against us just because we are not gay?" "All right, all right. I'll give you your license.. Next."
"Hi. We are here to get married." "Names?" "John Smith, Jane James, Robert Green, and June Johnson." "Who wants to marry whom?" "We all want to marry each other." "But there are four of you!" "That's right. You see, we're all bisexual. I love Jane and Robert, Jane loves me and June, June loves Robert and Jane, and Robert loves June and me. All of us getting married together is the only way that we can express our sexual preferences in a marital relationship." "But we've only been granting licenses to gay and lesbian couples." "So you're discriminating against bisexuals!" "No, it's just that, well, the traditional idea of marriage is that it's just for couples." "Since when are you standing on tradition?" "Well, I mean, you have to draw the line somewhere." "Who says?? There's no logical reason to limit marriage to couples. The more the better. Besides, we demand our rights! The mayor says the constitution guarantees equal protection under the law. Give us a marriage license!" "All right, all right. ..Next."
"Hello, I'd like a marriage license." "In what names?" "David Anderson." "And the other man?" "That's all. I want to marry myself." "Marry yourself?? What do you mean?" "Well, my psychiatrist says I have a dual personality, so I want to marry the two together. Maybe I can file a joint income-tax return." "That does it!? I quit!!? You people are making a mockery of marriage!!"
some people are extremist as are their views.
My first thoughts are that marriage should be between a man and women BUT times change and if for no other reason than it should be a parliamentary vote, I will/have voted yes
cheers
blaze
Phillipn said
10:59 AM Sep 20, 2017
Brownie2 wrote:
Phillipn,
I sure hope you are joking!
We've just had a great night with our gay mates that we met in 2012, (they've now been together for 41 years). They've been through the ringer in their lives together, but love each other deeply, and are committed! I'm not sure they want to be "married" actually, but their right to do so would be appreciated. Who are we to say that they should not be afforded the same rights as we heterosexual couples who have the right to share our property and chattels with the one we love! "Adam and Steve" what a poor try at dividing us!
Bob
If cattle were homos they would cut/spay and put them in a feed lot, as they are not breeders.
Aus-Kiwi said
11:03 AM Sep 20, 2017
We don't really need to breed !!
kesue said
01:46 PM Sep 20, 2017
And there's me thinking we have politicians to make this changes etc. on our behalf without wasting a **** load of money, which could well be spent on much better things at this time. I would think that there are much more important things happening around the world that our politicians should be concerned about at this moment in time.
Izabarack said
01:48 PM Sep 20, 2017
Phillipn wrote:
If cattle were homos they would cut/spay and put them in a feed lot, as they are not breeders.
What do they do to Lesbian cows?
11 Yes votes from my family posted this morning, Yea!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am so proud of my kid and grandkids that they would stand up and do the right thing.
Iza
The Belmont Bear said
03:06 PM Sep 20, 2017
Sorry I don't remember voting in the last election for a political representative based on his or her personal view on same sex marriage nor I'm sure did the majority of people. What gives them the right to vote in parliament on this topic and say that they are representing the views their constituents. If people believe that same sex marriage is such a big human rights issue hold a proper referendum and make the result binding otherwise change the wording and give the rest of us a break from all the squabbling. At the end of the day the result is really not going to impact on my way of life or change my own personal beliefs.
By the way Iza you are suggesting that voting Yes is the "right thing" there are just as many out there who believe that No is the "right thing" - I don't think that either side should be claiming the high moral ground of being the "right thing" they are both just different points of view.
-- Edited by The Belmont Bear on Wednesday 20th of September 2017 03:16:18 PM
Papou said
03:41 PM Sep 20, 2017
Whats that Bob Dylon Song ??? , The times they are a changing , and so is the World lol..
Papou said
03:43 PM Sep 20, 2017
Lancelot Link wrote:
Before they, the politicians, even asked us the question, there is the question concerning Family Law. The powers to be have not got the existing laws right! So how many millions of dollars is it going to take to get the new proposal right after the event? We are going to have a new dilemma concerning divorce, payments for children and ancillaries! Get the current laws right, then start on new laws to get them right, then ask the question!
Ditto to that...
Plain Truth said
03:54 PM Sep 20, 2017
Papou wrote:
Whats that Bob Dylon Song ??? , The times they are a changing , and so is the World lol..
But not for the Better
RustyD said
05:36 PM Sep 20, 2017
This is the sort of thing that worries me with the YES voters. The are really denying the freedom of speech to No voters.
If cattle were homos they would cut/spay and put them in a feed lot, as they are not breeders.
What do they do to Lesbian cows?
11 Yes votes from my family posted this morning, Yea!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am so proud of my kid and grandkids that they would stand up and do the right thing.
Iza
Lesbian cows vote "yes". It`s your choice.
-- Edited by Phillipn on Wednesday 20th of September 2017 06:06:49 PM
Why are we asking if we should say "Yes" or "No"to same sex marriage, it should be "Yes" or "No" to abolish marriage altogether, we would all be the same, with partners, if we so chose.
Times are changing - but I still cannot refer to my wife as my "partner/pardner" as she is not a cowboy.
Good Luck.
The irony of the current situation: Defacto couples often with little or no commitment, have greater legal rights/social acceptance, than same sex couples who WANT to make a commitment and are denied the right to legal commitment...how bizarre/illogical.......and absolutely nothing to do with Religion..live and let live...Hoo Roo
-- Edited by Goldfinger on Tuesday 19th of September 2017 08:22:44 PM
We had Adam and Eve, I don`t think we would have had the same result had it been Adam and Steve.
Phillipn,
I sure hope you are joking!
We've just had a great night with our gay mates that we met in 2012, (they've now been together for 41 years). They've been through the ringer in their lives together, but love each other deeply, and are committed! I'm not sure they want to be "married" actually, but their right to do so would be appreciated. Who are we to say that they should not be afforded the same rights as we heterosexual couples who have the right to share our property and chattels with the one we love! "Adam and Steve" what a poor try at dividing us!
Bob
Never, ever believed that Fairy Tale, so quite irrelevant to the current discussions in our society.
Pretty simple to allow all citizens equal access to the legal status of marriage. I am most annoyed about the sheer waste of taxpayer's money in a public opinion poll.
Iza
Gday...
Johnny Howard did it all by himself without any public consultation ... just added the words "between a man and a woman".
Now they want to spend $122million to 'undo' it ..........................................
Cheers - John
There is no need to make denigrating judgments about other person's belief systems underpining quite silly arguments intended to deny all people equality in how they might demonstrate their love and commitment to a partner. One good thing about the current debate is that it has provided ample opportunity to talk to my kids about ethics.
Iza
Iam of the believe that marriage is between a man and a woman but times are a changeling and no doubt Iam out of touch and will be ridiculed for my opinion .
Good morning. We want to apply for a marriage license."
"Names?", said the clerk.
"Tim and Jim Jones."
"Jones?? Are you related?? I see a resemblance."
"Yes, we're brothers."
"Brothers?? You can't get married."
"Why not?? Aren't you giving marriage licenses to same gender couples?"
"Yes, thousands. But we haven't had any siblings. That's incest!"
"Incest?" No, we are not gay."
"Not gay?? Then why do you want to get married?"
"For the financial benefits, of course. And we do love each other. Besides, we don't have any other prospects."
"But we're issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples who've claim they'd been denied equal protection under law.
If you are not gay, you can get married to a woman."
"Wait a minute. A gay man has the same right to marry a woman as I have.
But just because I'm straight doesn't mean I want to marry a woman. I want to marry Jim."
"And I want to marry Tim, Are you going to discriminate against us just because we are not gay?"
"All right, all right. I'll give you your license.. Next."
"Hi. We are here to get married."
"Names?"
"John Smith, Jane James, Robert Green, and June Johnson."
"Who wants to marry whom?"
"We all want to marry each other."
"But there are four of you!"
"That's right. You see, we're all bisexual. I love Jane and Robert, Jane loves me and June, June loves Robert and Jane, and Robert loves June and me. All of us getting married together is the only way that we can express our sexual preferences in a marital relationship."
"But we've only been granting licenses to gay and lesbian couples."
"So you're discriminating against bisexuals!"
"No, it's just that, well, the traditional idea of marriage is that it's just for couples."
"Since when are you standing on tradition?"
"Well, I mean, you have to draw the line somewhere."
"Who says?? There's no logical reason to limit marriage to couples. The more the better. Besides, we demand our rights! The mayor says the constitution guarantees equal protection under the law. Give us a marriage license!"
"All right, all right. ..Next."
"Hello, I'd like a marriage license."
"In what names?"
"David Anderson."
"And the other man?"
"That's all. I want to marry myself."
"Marry yourself?? What do you mean?"
"Well, my psychiatrist says I have a dual personality, so I want to marry the two together.
Maybe I can file a joint income-tax return."
"That does it!? I quit!!? You people are making a mockery of marriage!!"
some people are extremist as are their views.
My first thoughts are that marriage should be between a man and women BUT times change and if for no other reason than it should be a parliamentary vote, I will/have voted yes
cheers
blaze
If cattle were homos they would cut/spay and put them in a feed lot, as they are not breeders.
What do they do to Lesbian cows?
11 Yes votes from my family posted this morning, Yea!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am so proud of my kid and grandkids that they would stand up and do the right thing.
Iza
Sorry I don't remember voting in the last election for a political representative based on his or her personal view on same sex marriage nor I'm sure did the majority of people. What gives them the right to vote in parliament on this topic and say that they are representing the views their constituents. If people believe that same sex marriage is such a big human rights issue hold a proper referendum and make the result binding otherwise change the wording and give the rest of us a break from all the squabbling. At the end of the day the result is really not going to impact on my way of life or change my own personal beliefs.
By the way Iza you are suggesting that voting Yes is the "right thing" there are just as many out there who believe that No is the "right thing" - I don't think that either side should be claiming the high moral ground of being the "right thing" they are both just different points of view.
-- Edited by The Belmont Bear on Wednesday 20th of September 2017 03:16:18 PM
Ditto to that...
But not for the Better
www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-20/fair-work-to-probe-sacking-over-same-sex-marriage-survey/8964558
Lesbian cows vote "yes". It`s your choice.
-- Edited by Phillipn on Wednesday 20th of September 2017 06:06:49 PM