|
Well, ordered a large rainbow flag for the house, and small ones for the wife's and my desks at work.
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 06:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 18:39 |
|
|
SadisTech posted:Well, ordered a large rainbow flag for the house, and small ones for the wife's and my desks at work. Where do you buy a big gay flag, my house is visible from a motorway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 06:42
|
|
|
Zenithe posted:Where do you buy a big gay flag, my house is visible from a motorway. Nothing gayer than arts and crafts, make your own as good praxis.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 06:46
|
|
|
Zenithe posted:Where do you buy a big gay flag, my house is visible from a motorway. I just mail ordered from rainbowstore.com.au but there are lots of places to get them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 06:54
|
|
|
A reminder, put one of those small padlocks on your mailbox starting this weekend. Lots of ballots for this opinion poll will be swiped.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 06:59
|
|
|
Schlesische posted:Closer to 10; iirc a bunch of Labor MPs have declared they will not vote for SSM and Labour's support for SSM is non-binding at this stage. Marriage Equality thinks the votes are there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 07:02
|
|
|
MysticalMachineGun posted:I feel like it's increased since John Howard's tenure onwards. Then 9/11 really turbo charged the "this religion is wrong, our religion is right" rhetoric. Hillsong.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 07:08
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:Also loving lol at the precedent this could set. Not much of a precedent. The High Court has very rarely ruled in favour of limiting the executive's right to allocate funds to things.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 07:14
|
|
|
SadisTech posted:Well, ordered a large rainbow flag for the house, and small ones for the wife's and my desks at work. same, but with these 
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 07:18
|
|
|
Don Dongington posted:It's almost like Australians should stop voting for reptiles that don't care about them, But the wrong reptile might get in!
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 07:25
|
|
|
My 70 year old mum doesn't give a poo poo about gay marriage being law and by that metric I say lock it in.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 07:39
|
|
|
doesn't give a poo poo is bad because doesn't give a poo poo means they won't vote. the strong polling might actually be a detriment to marriage equality. a fair number of people will sit out on the basis of "it's definitely gonna pass so why should i bother figuring out how the postal system works". remember that australia has basically never had a voluntary vote for anything more important than "how high should the neighbourhood playgrounds hedges be?" - this is uncharted territory.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 07:45
|
|
|
Cladding thought: Can we close all the windows on cladded buildings then just set the exterior on fire, eliminating costly and long removal works? Pay me for my ideas!
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 07:45
|
|
|
Synthbuttrange posted:Cladding thought: Can we close all the windows on cladded buildings then just set the exterior on fire, eliminating costly and long removal works? Pay me for my ideas! go home andrew forrest, you're drunk
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 07:47
|
|
|
Brown Paper Bag posted:This is what will happen. They will attach a heap of "religious freedom" provisions to the bill, which will make it difficult for pro-SSM people to vote for. Kinda curious as to how the terms of religious freedom will be written, and interpreted. Will it be attached to the Marriage Act, or written into the sex discrimination act? Probably a Division 4 exemption, but there's already heaps of them there, ie; SECT 38 Educational institutions established for religious purposes (1) Nothing in paragraph 14(1)(a) or (b) or 14(2)(c) (employment hiring and firing) renders it unlawful for a person to discriminate against another person on the ground of the other person's sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital or relationship status or pregnancy in connection with employment as a member of the staff of an educational institution that is conducted in accordance with the doctrines, tenets, beliefs or teachings of a particular religion or creed, if the first-mentioned person so discriminates in good faith in order to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of adherents of that religion or creed. So it's not going to change heaps apart from some good and services provisioning that's going to be very specific, unless they use it as a wedge to introduce way more discriminatory practices against gays in general. Not just gay wedding cakes, but no more gay cakes at all, etc Also OH gently caress THEY UPGRADED AUSTLII
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 07:48
|
|
|
Has it even been properly discussed how the ABS will report the numbers? Given that they are a statistics agency running a poll I have to imagine the idea of just jumping out raw numbers without context goes against most of their fundamental concepts of what a poll is, but I also can't imagine the conservatives would accept anything that compensates for lower turnout at lower age levels.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 07:52
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:doesn't give a poo poo is bad because doesn't give a poo poo means they won't vote. Doesn't give a poo poo means is not offended by in this case. She is a 70 year old Irish Catholic. That bodes well for vote in my mind.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 07:53
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:doesn't give a poo poo is bad because doesn't give a poo poo means they won't vote. What's turnout like for council voting? Still compulsory, but done by mail. Senor Tron posted:Has it even been properly discussed how the ABS will report the numbers? lol. It's literally just going to be raw count. Can you imagine the uproar if they applied weighting? It's not a survey, it's a vote, and everyone knows it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 07:53
|
|
|
Senor Tron posted:Has it even been properly discussed how the ABS will report the numbers? from the senate committee hearing this morning: https://twitter.com/lanesainty/status/905580010949427200
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 08:01
|
|
|
You'd think the prime statistics agency could make it feasible but idk
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 08:07
|
|
|
Just an FYI if you aren't doing what you can to push for a yes vote then you forfeit all right to bitch about it at this stage. A metric fuckton of organizations are working on this, you can find one that you align with and volunterr with them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 08:10
|
|
|
I'm working on hijacking deliveries of the papers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 08:13
|
|
|
When is the vote thingie coming out?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 08:21
|
|
|
Just make both camps (un)happy by banning marriage completely and retroactively annulling all marriages so nobody is married anymore 
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 08:26
|
|
|
Synthbuttrange posted:I'm working on hijacking deliveries of the papers. I can't say I agree with a lot of Carjackers For Equality's platform, but I won't deny they bring a unique skillset to the table.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 08:29
|
|
|
Even my dealer is supporting marriage equality, get on board with it guys.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 08:43
|
|
|
Vote for Marriage Equality or you're gay
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 09:47
|
|
|
iajanus posted:You'd think the prime statistics agency could make it feasible but idk Not if they want it to be anonymous. If they were going to weight it they'd need to individualise letters to match the responses to demographics
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 09:56
|
|
|
Also they are counting by electorates so individual MPs can have a fig leaf to vote no.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 10:03
|
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:Also they are counting by electorates so individual MPs can have a fig leaf to vote no. Gonna be fun when Warringah votes massively in favour of it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 10:11
|
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:Also they are counting by electorates so individual MPs can have a fig leaf to vote no. I really hope Abbott's electorate votes yes I think i'll steal a bunch of my neighbours 'ballots' and vote yes for them
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 10:13
|
|
|
gay picnic defence posted:I really hope Abbott's electorate votes yes I admire your faith that you think the "vote" (survey) tally will in any way not be massively fiddled with at the processing end, thus making any majority "yes" vote moot. This is a 122m expenditure to justify an old fat IPA guy who probably engages in domestic violence anyway to send a paragraph he drafted 12 months ago so Turnbull can appease enough of his power base to keep clinging to power a bit longer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 10:21
|
|
|
The confusing part being the IPA libertarianism would be for same sex marriage. Well not confusing we all know why.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 10:25
|
|
|
Lid posted:The confusing part being the IPA libertarianism would be for same sex marriage. Well not confusing we all know why. Libertarians are not known for having consistency in their political beliefs
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 11:08
|
|
|
norp posted:Libertarians are not known for having consistency in their political beliefs No you see they are consistent! https://ipa.org.au/ipa-today/little-thought-consequences-gay-marriage-reduce-freedom With Little Thought To Consequences, Gay Marriage Could Reduce Freedom
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 11:21
|
|
|
Lid posted:No you see they are consistent! It reduces freedom to the people that matter to the IPA - WASPs
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 11:44
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/spookperson/status/904938003079905284 https://twitter.com/spookperson/status/904940118087049216 There's more, but I don't want to link fifty tweets at once. Click the dateline in a twitter post to see the full chain of replies
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 11:53
|
|
My first car was a stick
|
Two of the ex-IPA guys in Parliament (Paterson and Wilson) support SSM I think.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 11:54
|
|
|
quote:“Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?” Jesus christ, that's the question? gently caress I hope they just remove the bit about marriage being between a man and a woman and don't make specific reference to same-sex marriage in the bill.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 12:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 18:39 |
|
|
WhiskeyWhiskers posted:Jesus christ, that's the question? gently caress I hope they just remove the bit about marriage being between a man and a woman and don't make specific reference to same-sex marriage in the bill. What did the previously proposed changes do?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 13:06
|
|