Skip to main content

Do we have a politics thread to discuss things political?

Tony Abbott view -

The push for changes to the Marriage Act is a “war on our way of life that politically-correct activists have been prosecuting for years now. If you’re worried about religious freedom and freedom of speech, vote ‘No’, and if you don’t like political correctness, vote ‘No’ because voting ‘No’ will help to stop political correctness in its tracks.”

What a twat.

I would vote if this country recognized all tax payers should get to have a say even if they are not Australian Citizens. Not that this is something that should need a vote at all. Just make it happen already.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kxk
Tony Abbott view -

The push for changes to the Marriage Act is a “war on our way of life that politically-correct activists have been prosecuting for years now. If you’re worried about religious freedom and freedom of speech, vote ‘No’, and if you don’t like political correctness, vote ‘No’ because voting ‘No’ will help to stop political correctness in its tracks.”

What a twat.

I would vote if this country recognized all tax payers should get to have a say even if they are not Australian Citizens. Not that this is something that should need a vote at all. Just make it happen already.

He's an awful person. I agree, they should make it happen. Now. Though it should have happened years ago.
 
Penny Wong: Yes this postal ploy hurts, but I plead with you - don't boycott it
COMMENT
Penny Wong
August 10 2017 - 6:03PM

There's no denying the Turnbull government's opinion poll is a stacked deck, designed to mark every card against those seeking marriage equality.

That's why supporters of marriage equality need to work twice as hard to get out the vote, and ensure that Malcolm Turnbull's $122 million 'survey' accurately reflects the overwhelming will of the Australian people.

Calls for a boycott are understandable. LGBTI Australians rightly feel insulted that we have to ask permission to be equal.

We didn't want to be here. We shouldn't be here. But now we are here, we have to fight.

Yes, there are serious questions about the legitimacy of the political fix chosen by Malcolm Turnbull to overcome the Senate's repeated rejection of his plebiscite.

We know from the 1997 postal ballot on the republic that turnout is likely to be very low, especially among young people. It will disenfranchise people in remote areas, especially Indigenous Australians, and those travelling overseas. And there are very serious questions about the ability of the ABS to run such a ballot.
Advertisement

It's no wonder pollsters have ridiculed postal votes as a "complete waste of money".

And we know - because we are seeing it already - that Malcolm Turnbull's opinion poll will unleash a new wave of hatred and bigotry against LGBTI Australians, and especially against our kids.

But Malcom Turnbull's pathetic capitulation to the hard right of his party means that the campaign has been launched, and unless halted by the High Court, the ballots will be going out to millions of Australians in the next few weeks.

Labor supports marriage equality and we will campaign for the rights of all Australians to marry the person they love. Unlike Malcolm, we will fight for equality.

Right now a boycott can only play into the hands of those who would deny us our rights.

So we must do everything we can to get as many people as possible on to the electoral roll in the next fortnight, to register all those young people who have never voted, and re-enrol all those struck off by moving house.

"We didn't want to be here. We shouldn't be here. But now we are here, we have to fight"

And then we must ensure we get those ballots back in record numbers to shame this weak and leaderless government into finally doing the right thing.

And because we believe in equality, if, after all this, Malcom Turnbull still won't act, Bill Shorten has made clear that Labor will legislate for marriage equality in our first hundred days in government.


Penny Wong is Labor's spokeswoman for foreign affairs, and is the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate. She and her partner, Sophie Allouache, have two daughters.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ith-you--dont-boycott-it-20170810-gxtfa8.html

I have to agree, the worst thing that could happen - and exactly what opponents want to happen - is for supporters to boycott the vote. I don't agree with this going to a plebiscite, but if it is, I want it to win and by a healthy margin too. Boycotting won't help.
 
Last edited:
Want a plebiscite? Here are 15 things we should be voting on

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/re...n/news-story/8ec8e335e883fedcd46c32d573994f19

OPINION

THE government is about to spend $122 million on a non-binding, voluntary plebiscite, and I, for one, am excited. I love being asked for my opinion!

Having said that, I don’t at all like the topic of the plebiscite. Why should I have to vote on whether the LGBTQ community is entitled to basic human rights? Isn’t it obvious that they do? We don’t need a plebiscite on Marriage Equality. We need a leader with a backbone who’ll pass the bloody legislation.

But hey, if they want a plebiscite — if they want to spend $122 million asking stupid questions — I have some much better suggestions for them.

Here, my friends, are some really contentious Plebiscite questions:

1. Is white chocolate real chocolate or just confectionery?

1. Does Coke No Sugar taste exactly the same as Coke Zero or completely different?

2. Who is the best Hemsworth, Chris, Liam or that other one?

a21f38cfbe27983a405e4976e0558373

It’s Chris, obviously. Picture: Jason Kempin/Getty ImagesSource:Getty Images

3. Should Sam Frost be allowed to appear on Home and Away given her lack of acting training?


4. Is Donald Trump an actual human being, a sentient cartoon character, or a Lizard Person?

5. Should toilet paper be hung with the roll facing over or under?

6. Is the Thermomix the greatest kitchen tool ever created, a useful but overly hyped mixer, or a sinister cult that will steal your soul and blend it into a sauce?

7. Can you really wear Ugg boots “ironically”?

8. Coriander: Fragrant herb or Satan’s weed?

9. Should I cut myself a fringe?

10. Is activewear acceptable outside the gym?

11. Should shop assistants inquire about our day or just leave us alone to browse?

12. How many times can you wear a pair of jeans without washing them?

13. Are all the good men taken?

14. If Vegemite wasn’t called Vegemite what would it be called?

15. Why are our politicians so piss-weak they can’t do the right thing without wasting $122 million?
 
1. Real.

2. Same.

3. Chris.

4. I don't know her, but she pops up far too often for her being on just a reality show.

5. Human.

6. I don't know.

7.. Over.

8. Wear whatever.

9. It's ok.

10. I'm not your boss.

11. Yes.

12. Leave me alone.

13. Twice.

14. No, I'm not taken.

15. That stuff you shouldn't over use.

16. Because they are cowards.
 
So section 44 is certainly getting a workout lately. The court's decision will be one to remember as no one seems safe from s44. Not even Barnaby Choice.
 
It would be good if all these uncover kiwi citizens involved in Australian government did something about some of the crappy policies put in place around kiwis living in Australia.

Australia's NZ uni fee change ruled 'discriminatory'
7:41 am on 14 August 2017


Australian lawmakers have ruled a proposal to remove university subsidies for New Zealanders living in Australia is discriminatory.

eight_col_32817412_l.jpg

The new law could triple university fees for Kiwis studying in Australia. Photo: 123rf.com

The law change - signalled in the federal Budget in May - affects expatriates and permanent residents who were previously eligible for subsidised higher education places.

The new rules could see fees for those students triple.

The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights voted unanimously last week that the change is discriminatory.

In a report tabled in Parliament, the committee said the removal of the Commonwealth subsidy "directly discriminates against permanent residents and New Zealand citizens".

"This group will have to pay fees (either upfront, or repaid over time) that are substantially higher than Australian citizens."

However, the committee's deputy chair, Queensland federal Labor MP Graham Perrett, acknowledged its ruling was toothless.

Regardless, the committee's report would now go to government executives.

When the committee questioned why the government was discriminating, it could not justify it, said Mr Perrett.

"The minister didn't actually justify why he has got rid of this, but he did say: We now let New Zealanders access this scheme where they can get a loan to pay off the higher education fees," he said.

It may fall foul of an agreement between the two nations, but that was not enough to deter the Australian government.

"Nation states sign treaties, it wouldn't be the first time an executive might not have complied with all aspects of a treaty they'd signed and ratified."

There were many New Zealanders living in Mr Perrett's electorate, with socio-economic challenges, and he expected more New Zealanders to raise their concerns with the government, he said.
 
I read that jellyfish are thriving because of global warming.
maybe the Jellyfish will be the superior beings on Earth one day - the aliens will need to ask them take me to your leader. And that leader will still have more spine than Malcolm Turnbull.
 
AUSTRALIA DAY..............who cares when it is as long as we get a holiday?

And as it is offensive to Indigenous people change it.

As a kid I don't even recall celebrating Aus Day....and it isn't even that much of a tradition

History...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_Day

Let us please become a Republic, and celebrate.....until then give us a new date,maybe Federation date, then make Republic on that day when it comes:)
 
Back
Top