Current estimates is that a bill might pass but the numbers are still very tight.
Why is the Parliament of Australia the only cross section of people in this country where the numbers on this issue are still close? Last survey revealed that 75% of Australians are in favour of gay marriage.
And for those 25% who arenât, Louis CK has something to say to youâŚ
I don't fully understand the argument to be honest.
By wanting marriage equality there needs to be a change in the actual definition of marriage, currently that definition is based on our Christian heritage whether people like it or not.
Iâm a Christian and Iâm still working my way through it all.
I certainly believe that the state has a responsibility to ensure its members are looked after so that one is not discriminated over the other, I donât know if that means the whole meaning of marriage needs to change.
Christianity is only one culture though, itâs not the only culture. Plenty of other cultures have/had different forms of marriage. Iâm not Christian so why should I be bound by your beliefs?
I DO have an issue with forcing priests to marry people who donât conform to the priests beliefs. Thankfully, this proposal isnât doing that. This wonât effect you at all. And it wonât change any childrens rights either.
I have no idea why anyone would oppose this, unless your intent is to force people to conform to your personal beliefs.
I think the problem that some people find of concern is what is happening in the US and UK where organisations or businesses that choose not to do something that goes against their beliefs are being targetted and finding themselves being charged under hate crimes, fined and, in some cases although rare, jailed. Some are concerned that might happen here in Aus once this issues is resolved.
As a Christian I appose this change however I do not believe in standing in the way of it, and I acknowlegde that the change will come soon. I also support the view that same-sex relationships should be treated legally as any other form of relationship.
well businesses should just do âwhat their business doesâ, regardless of the sexual orientation of the customer. You cant spin discrimination to be a âreligious rightâ and then call the opposition to discrimination to being âtargetedâ.
If the same business werenât serving wearers of polyester, shellfish eaters or adulteress I could maybe understand, at least weâd have some consistency, but they do serve those people. Refusing to serves gays is just throwing the toys out of the cot because same sex-marriage laws were upheld.
If this is the most pressing issue this country is facing at the moment, then we are in good shape.
So government should only tackle one issue at a time?
Its been put
I would prefer it if they spent more time dealing with proper issues instead of this crap to be honest.
Hmmmm.
The Parliament has allocated a grand total of ten minutes so far to this issue and that was this morning.
If you donât think that lawful discrimination against a group of persons based on their sexual orientation is a âproper issueâ then I donât quite know what to tell you.
Nonsense - I dare say all their media strategy briefings have revolved around this subject.
Its not a proper issue in context to other more valid issues. Its a feel good topic that appeals to people because its something the masses can all understand.
Third world countries must look at first world countries debating this nonsense and think weâre a pack of spoilt morons. Its embarrassing.
Oh please.
More valid issues like taking away the citizenship of those involved in terrorism? A completely meaningless populist gesture?
Yeah, lets allocate more parliamentary time to that. â â â â those spoiled gay people and their rights, weâve just got no time for them.
That has more validity than â â â â â â gay marriage.
Who f**king cares. I doubt even gay people care to be honest.
Sells a few papers I guess and the media get to use footage of some lesbians which is always a good seller.
Right wing conservatives care, thatâs who (even the gay ones). Otherwise it would have been all over long ago.
Its been put up in the Parliament now, what - twelve times I think.
Failed every single time.
And lets not forget that the Rudd/Gillard government had 6 years to change the law.
Now all of a sudden its an issue of major importance.
Spare me
Well, I never said that Labor was without its conservative right wing reps, did I? And I wasn't just talking about politicians anyhow.
Personally I don't care, so perhaps we have that in common, but I can see that many people do.
Not everyone who opposes this issue are âright-wing conservativeâ types. Stereotyping isnât helpful in this sort of discussion.
If this is the most pressing issue this country is facing at the moment, then we are in good shape.
So government should only tackle one issue at a time?
I would prefer it if they spent more time dealing with proper issues instead of this crap to be honest.
Hmmmm.
The Parliament has allocated a grand total of ten minutes so far to this issue and that was this morning.
If you donât think that lawful discrimination against a group of persons based on their sexual orientation is a âproper issueâ then I donât quite know what to tell you.
Nonsense - I dare say all their media strategy briefings have revolved around this subject.
Its not a proper issue in context to other more valid issues. Its a feel good topic that appeals to people because its something the masses can all understand.
Third world countries must look at first world countries debating this nonsense and think weâre a pack of spoilt morons. Its embarrassing.
Oh please.
More valid issues like taking away the citizenship of those involved in terrorism? A completely meaningless populist gesture?
Yeah, lets allocate more parliamentary time to that. â â â â those spoiled gay people and their rights, weâve just got no time for them.
That has more validity than â â â â â â gay marriage.
Who f**king cares. I doubt even gay people care to be honest.
Sells a few papers I guess and the media get to use footage of some lesbians which is always a good seller.
Iâm not sure if youâre are just a garden variety idiot, or someone who is just incredibly out of touch with the community.
I don't fully understand the argument to be honest.
By wanting marriage equality there needs to be a change in the actual definition of marriage, currently that definition is based on our Christian heritage whether people like it or not.
Iâm a Christian and Iâm still working my way through it all.
I certainly believe that the state has a responsibility to ensure its members are looked after so that one is not discriminated over the other, I donât know if that means the whole meaning of marriage needs to change.
Christianity is only one culture though, itâs not the only culture. Plenty of other cultures have/had different forms of marriage. Iâm not Christian so why should I be bound by your beliefs?
I DO have an issue with forcing priests to marry people who donât conform to the priests beliefs. Thankfully, this proposal isnât doing that. This wonât effect you at all. And it wonât change any childrens rights either.
I have no idea why anyone would oppose this, unless your intent is to force people to conform to your personal beliefs.
I think the problem that some people find of concern is what is happening in the US and UK where organisations or businesses that choose not to do something that goes against their beliefs are being targetted and finding themselves being charged under hate crimes, fined and, in some cases although rare, jailed. Some are concerned that might happen here in Aus once this issues is resolved.
As a Christian I appose this change however I do not believe in standing in the way of it, and I acknowlegde that the change will come soon. I also support the view that same-sex relationships should be treated legally as any other form of relationship.
If this is the most pressing issue this country is facing at the moment, then we are in good shape.
So government should only tackle one issue at a time?
Its been put
I would prefer it if they spent more time dealing with proper issues instead of this crap to be honest.
Hmmmm.
The Parliament has allocated a grand total of ten minutes so far to this issue and that was this morning.
If you donât think that lawful discrimination against a group of persons based on their sexual orientation is a âproper issueâ then I donât quite know what to tell you.
Nonsense - I dare say all their media strategy briefings have revolved around this subject.
Its not a proper issue in context to other more valid issues. Its a feel good topic that appeals to people because its something the masses can all understand.
Third world countries must look at first world countries debating this nonsense and think weâre a pack of spoilt morons. Its embarrassing.
Oh please.
More valid issues like taking away the citizenship of those involved in terrorism? A completely meaningless populist gesture?
Yeah, lets allocate more parliamentary time to that. â â â â those spoiled gay people and their rights, weâve just got no time for them.
That has more validity than â â â â â â gay marriage.
Who f**king cares. I doubt even gay people care to be honest.
Sells a few papers I guess and the media get to use footage of some lesbians which is always a good seller.
Right wing conservatives care, thatâs who (even the gay ones). Otherwise it would have been all over long ago.
Its been put up in the Parliament now, what - twelve times I think.
Failed every single time.
And lets not forget that the Rudd/Gillard government had 6 years to change the law.
Now all of a sudden its an issue of major importance.
Spare me
Well, I never said that Labor was without its conservative right wing reps, did I? And I wasn't just talking about politicians anyhow.
Personally I don't care, so perhaps we have that in common, but I can see that many people do.
If this is the most pressing issue this country is facing at the moment, then we are in good shape.
So government should only tackle one issue at a time?
Its been put
I would prefer it if they spent more time dealing with proper issues instead of this crap to be honest.
Hmmmm.
The Parliament has allocated a grand total of ten minutes so far to this issue and that was this morning.
If you donât think that lawful discrimination against a group of persons based on their sexual orientation is a âproper issueâ then I donât quite know what to tell you.
Nonsense - I dare say all their media strategy briefings have revolved around this subject.
Its not a proper issue in context to other more valid issues. Its a feel good topic that appeals to people because its something the masses can all understand.
Third world countries must look at first world countries debating this nonsense and think weâre a pack of spoilt morons. Its embarrassing.
Oh please.
More valid issues like taking away the citizenship of those involved in terrorism? A completely meaningless populist gesture?
Yeah, lets allocate more parliamentary time to that. â â â â those spoiled gay people and their rights, weâve just got no time for them.
That has more validity than â â â â â â gay marriage.
Who f**king cares. I doubt even gay people care to be honest.
Sells a few papers I guess and the media get to use footage of some lesbians which is always a good seller.
Right wing conservatives care, thatâs who (even the gay ones). Otherwise it would have been all over long ago.
Its been put up in the Parliament now, what - twelve times I think.
Failed every single time.
And lets not forget that the Rudd/Gillard government had 6 years to change the law.
Now all of a sudden its an issue of major importance.
If this is the most pressing issue this country is facing at the moment, then we are in good shape.
So government should only tackle one issue at a time?
I would prefer it if they spent more time dealing with proper issues instead of this crap to be honest.
Hmmmm.
The Parliament has allocated a grand total of ten minutes so far to this issue and that was this morning.
If you donât think that lawful discrimination against a group of persons based on their sexual orientation is a âproper issueâ then I donât quite know what to tell you.
Nonsense - I dare say all their media strategy briefings have revolved around this subject.
Its not a proper issue in context to other more valid issues. Its a feel good topic that appeals to people because its something the masses can all understand.
Third world countries must look at first world countries debating this nonsense and think weâre a pack of spoilt morons. Its embarrassing.
Oh please.
More valid issues like taking away the citizenship of those involved in terrorism? A completely meaningless populist gesture?
Yeah, lets allocate more parliamentary time to that. â â â â those spoiled gay people and their rights, weâve just got no time for them.
That has more validity than â â â â â â gay marriage.
Who f**king cares. I doubt even gay people care to be honest.
Sells a few papers I guess and the media get to use footage of some lesbians which is always a good seller.
If this is the most pressing issue this country is facing at the moment, then we are in good shape.
So government should only tackle one issue at a time?
I would prefer it if they spent more time dealing with proper issues instead of this crap to be honest.
Hmmmm.
The Parliament has allocated a grand total of ten minutes so far to this issue and that was this morning.
If you donât think that lawful discrimination against a group of persons based on their sexual orientation is a âproper issueâ then I donât quite know what to tell you.
Nonsense - I dare say all their media strategy briefings have revolved around this subject.
Its not a proper issue in context to other more valid issues. Its a feel good topic that appeals to people because its something the masses can all understand.
Third world countries must look at first world countries debating this nonsense and think weâre a pack of spoilt morons. Its embarrassing.
Oh please.
More valid issues like taking away the citizenship of those involved in terrorism? A completely meaningless populist gesture?
Yeah, lets allocate more parliamentary time to that. â â â â those spoiled gay people and their rights, weâve just got no time for them.
That has more validity than â â â â â â gay marriage.
Who f**king cares. I doubt even gay people care to be honest.
Sells a few papers I guess and the media get to use footage of some lesbians which is always a good seller.
Right wing conservatives care, thatâs who (even the gay ones). Otherwise it would have been all over long ago.
I don't fully understand the argument to be honest.
By wanting marriage equality there needs to be a change in the actual definition of marriage, currently that definition is based on our Christian heritage whether people like it or not.
Iâm a Christian and Iâm still working my way through it all.
I certainly believe that the state has a responsibility to ensure its members are looked after so that one is not discriminated over the other, I donât know if that means the whole meaning of marriage needs to change.
How the fark, does it affect you if two men or two women decide to get married?
Do you care if two people live together and devote their lives to each other? It is their farking business and not mine or yours.
I am not a Christian, and I am atheist; and I donât hate much beside Carlton and their supporters, but I hate farking Christians who think the world started when some fictional character named Jesus was born. Your whole argument is about your religion and nothing to do with human rights or even the warped reality that you farking Christians own the place and are the only one who have any morals.
Wow, talk about an over-reaction, and an over-reaction to something that wasnât even said. Put your hatred and bias away when speaking to people and you may gain a little respect and find people are more open to talking to you about issues, until then you keep behaving like a âGoodesâ and coping flak for it.
If this is the most pressing issue this country is facing at the moment, then we are in good shape.
So government should only tackle one issue at a time?
I would prefer it if they spent more time dealing with proper issues instead of this crap to be honest.
Hmmmm.
The Parliament has allocated a grand total of ten minutes so far to this issue and that was this morning.
If you donât think that lawful discrimination against a group of persons based on their sexual orientation is a âproper issueâ then I donât quite know what to tell you.
Nonsense - I dare say all their media strategy briefings have revolved around this subject.
Its not a proper issue in context to other more valid issues. Its a feel good topic that appeals to people because its something the masses can all understand.
Third world countries must look at first world countries debating this nonsense and think weâre a pack of spoilt morons. Its embarrassing.
Oh please.
More valid issues like taking away the citizenship of those involved in terrorism? A completely meaningless populist gesture?
Yeah, lets allocate more parliamentary time to that. â â â â those spoiled gay people and their rights, weâve just got no time for them.
If this is the most pressing issue this country is facing at the moment, then we are in good shape.
So government should only tackle one issue at a time?
I would prefer it if they spent more time dealing with proper issues instead of this crap to be honest.
Hmmmm.
The Parliament has allocated a grand total of ten minutes so far to this issue and that was this morning.
If you donât think that lawful discrimination against a group of persons based on their sexual orientation is a âproper issueâ then I donât quite know what to tell you.
Nonsense - I dare say all their media strategy briefings have revolved around this subject.
Its not a proper issue in context to other more valid issues. Its a feel good topic that appeals to people because its something the masses can all understand.
Third world countries must look at first world countries debating this nonsense and think weâre a pack of spoilt morons. Its embarrassing.
If this is the most pressing issue this country is facing at the moment, then we are in good shape.
So government should only tackle one issue at a time?
I would prefer it if they spent more time dealing with proper issues instead of this crap to be honest.
Hmmmm.
The Parliament has allocated a grand total of ten minutes so far to this issue and that was this morning.
If you donât think that lawful discrimination against a group of persons based on their sexual orientation is a âproper issueâ then I donât quite know what to tell you.
