|
Literally a guy is talking about how vaccines are for depopulation by the government
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 18:46 |
|
|
"The more vaccines the children have the sicker they get" i am terrified of the herd immunity at a rally like this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
Lob a chicken pox filled child at them
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
Make a sign that says "I, too, hate science"
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
Tell them there's chemtrails about and they need to run for cover or the mind controlling chems will get into their systems.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 04:42
|
|
|
IMO shoot them in the face and burn the bodies. Unironically.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 04:45
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
LOL
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 04:55
|
|
|
Laffo. Anyway... quote:Australia Post has started mailing the same-sex marriage survey forms to millions of households across the nation. Labor leader Bill Shorten has been doing his best to 'get out the vote', as they would say in the United States. As you know, this survey is voluntary. Neat! quote:or the religious convictions of an individual during the survey period. Oh.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
quote:or the religious convictions of an individual during the survey period. Wikipedia posted:[the Satanic Temple]...considers same-sex marriage a religious sacrament, and therefore argues that bans on the practice violate Satanists' freedom of religion. Probably a bit late to get an Australian Chapter up and running, but there could be some hi jinx had throwing all those dumb "No" religious arguments back at them...
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 05:06
|
|
|
Synthbuttrange posted:Laffo. Sounds like we have full rights to unload with all barrels for their actual political views, which is, y'know, the thing we actually want to fight them on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
Yeah if you think radicalised islamists; a small minority in the west, with no real power; are a frightening concept, then you don't want want to know what radicalised Christians; not a minority in the west, and with arguably too much power; would be like. I mean you can go look at Charlottesville if you want a preview, but if you actually empower the potatriots and fundie Hillsong freaks to a call to action, it's going to be not good. Hit them for what they say, not who they are.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 05:15
|
|
|
 To stop the terrorists trying to ruin the lawn http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-12/security-fences-shut-patrons-out-parliament-house-grassy-slopes/8896074
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 05:20
|
|
My first car was a stick
|
Even ignoring the crushing uglyness of the fence, you really have to wonder what protection it provides. You haven't been able to drive a car onto the lawns since the early 2000s when they installed a concrete barrier around the bottom.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 05:24
|
|
|
You know it's to keep the hordes of protesters off when they don't have a free vote for SSM post-survey.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 05:25
|
|
|
open24hours posted:Even ignoring the crushing uglyness of the fence, you really have to wonder what protection it provides. You haven't been able to drive a car onto the lawns since the early 2000s when they installed a concrete barrier around the bottom. It's in case the terrorists come on quadbikes after heavy rain
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 05:26
|
|
|
bandaid.friend posted:
Can we get Mexico to (not) pay for it as well? Chump change compared to Trump Tower Bigly Wall 2.0.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 05:30
|
|
|
open24hours posted:Even ignoring the crushing uglyness of the fence, you really have to wonder what protection it provides. You haven't been able to drive a car onto the lawns since the early 2000s when they installed a concrete barrier around the bottom. Suicide bombers who are smart enough to strap shaped charges to themselves that will penetrate however much dirt is on top of the building, but dumb enough not to know how to get over a fence?
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 05:31
|
|
|
look ladders are expensive and complicated to use
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 05:38
|
|
|
iajanus posted:look ladders are expensive and complicated to use look at you and your fancy pants ladder back in my day we had to climb uphill both ways with a piece of rope
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 05:38
|
|
|
I like that the whole point of the design was that people could walk and sit on that lawn over parliament house and then politicians were like NOPE CAN'T HAVE THE loving PLEBS ON OUR GODDAMN LAWN.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
Last year we were in Canberra for a wedding and I took a wrong turn and ended up driving through the Parliament House car park This year I'd be arrested for that, apparently.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 06:00
|
|
|
MysticalMachineGun posted:Last year we were in Canberra for a wedding and I took a wrong turn and ended up driving through the Parliament House car park also for you are posting
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 06:02
|
|
|
Birdstrike posted:also for you are posting got im
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 06:14
|
|
|
Elissimpark posted:Probably a bit late to get an Australian Chapter up and running, but there could be some hi jinx had throwing all those dumb "No" religious arguments back at them... I mentioned before, but there's a valid argument to make that the marriage act violates the Constitution's freedom of religion clause with regards to churches which are pro-gay-marriage.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 06:18
|
|
|
I don't think that would hold up. Presumably if the courts accepted those sorts of arguments polygamy would be legal by now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 06:20
|
|
|
Tony Abbott on why same sex marriage would fundamentally change society Tony Abbott 1 hr ago Like most, I have tried to be there for friends and family who are gay. They are good people who deserve our love, respect and inclusion but that doesn't mean that we can't continue to reserve the term "marriage" for the relationship of one man with one woman, ideally for life and usually dedicated to children. ... To demand "marriage equality", therefore, is quite misleading. Same sex couples already have that. This debate is about changing marriage, not extending it. And if you change marriage, you change society; because marriage is the basis of family; and family is the foundation of community. Supporters of same sex marriage say they are concerned about the bigotry and intolerance that will be whipped up by the plebiscite now going ahead. So far, it's the supporters of change, not the opponents, who've been responsible for bullying and hate speech. ... "Love might be love" but it's striking how little love the supporters of same sex marriage are showing for anyone who disagrees with them. It's paradoxical how respect has flown out the window in the fight for yet more respect. It's hard to see, at least from the tenor of the campaign to bring it in, how we would be a more decent society with same sex marriage than without it. At one level, the same sex marriage debate is of vastly less relevance than most people's daily struggle to pay their bills, to improve their lives and that of their families, and to try to get on with their neighbours and workmates. But at another level, almost nothing is more important than the values that we cherish and the principles on which our society is based. We shouldn't lightly change what's been the foundation of our society for generations; and, if we do, it should only be after the most careful weighing of all the consequences. Yet if the polls are to be believed, we are about to discard the concept of marriage that has stood since time immemorial in favour of a new concept that would have been scornfully rejected even by gay people just a generation ago. This week, an anti-same sex marriage gay activist posed the question: "How are women going to recognise lesbianism as an alternative to heterosexuality if they don't see us protesting against institutions that have been harmful to us: like marriage, prostitution and the nuclear family?" I'm sure that some gay activists really believe that they are trying to promote stable, long-term relationships by extending marriage to same sex couples; but others clearly want to subvert marriage. And the gay people demanding to be married don't want their relationships to change; they just want them to be accorded a new status. It's said that there should be absolutely no difference, even in terminology, between relationships because "love is love". Yet there are many different types of love. No one is saying that one type of loving relationship is better than another, just that they can be different. By all means, let's find a way to solemnise what is intended to be a sacrificial love between two people of the same sex; but it remains a different love even though it's not a lesser one. At one level, insisting upon any particular definition of marriage may seem like pedantry. At another level, though, it's important to maintain cultural and intellectual integrity. A man is not a woman just because he wants to be, and a same sex relationship should not be able to become a marriage just because activists demand it. All the overseas evidence shows that allowing "any two persons" to marry brings many other changes in its wake. In Britain, Catholic adoption agencies have been forced to close down and an orthodox Jewish school threatened with defunding. In America, a baker has been prosecuted for refusing to put a slogan on a wedding cake. This week in Quarterly Essay, a "safe schools" supporter, Benjamin Law, said that "it might be stating the obvious but same sex marriage is far from the final frontier in the battle against homophobia" – prompting the equally obvious question: how can parents keep gender fluidity programmes out of schools here in Australia when gender fluidity has entered the Marriage Act? If the advocates for same sex marriage can't demonstrate how freedom of speech, freedom of religion and parental choice will be protected in their brave new world, they're asking voters to sign a blank cheque. Australians have never liked being pushed around or hoodwinked. When big businesses from Uber, to Subway, to the makers of Magnum ice cream are virtue signalling on same sex marriage, it's time to say that political correctness has got completely out of hand and to vote "no" to stop it in its tracks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 06:44
|
|
|
No doubt people will still campaign for the abolition of marriage after SSM is made legal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 06:48
|
|
|
So Abbott uses a TERF for reference and casually drops in "virtue signalling" And the projection that the Yes campaign has been bullying the No, what a bald-faced lie
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 06:51
|
|
|
"It's a long time, thank God, since gay people have been discriminated against and just about everyone old enough to remember that time is invariably embarrassed at the intolerance that was once common. Already, indeed, same sex couples in a settled domestic relationship have exactly the same rights as people who are married."
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 06:55
|
|
|
Imagine being Tony's sister going through this poo poo right now. Death by facepalm.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 07:00
|
|
|
MysticalMachineGun posted:And the projection that the Yes campaign has been bullying the No, what a bald-faced lie It's one of those arguments that's hard to refute not because it's got a point or anything, but because it's just so wrong. It's like finding someone who thinks two plus two is seven, only their interpretation of the number seven is somehow bigoted. Where do you start in counter-arguing it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 07:03
|
|
|
Zenithe posted:Imagine being Tony's sister going through this poo poo right now. You'd have a strong case for justifiable fratricide.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 07:04
|
|
|
We regret to inform you that the number 7 is racist.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 07:04
|
|
|
Cleretic posted:It's one of those arguments that's hard to refute not because it's got a point or anything, but because it's just so wrong. It's like finding someone who thinks two plus two is seven, only their interpretation of the number seven is somehow bigoted. Where do you start in counter-arguing it? If this were a Facebook argument or something similar I'd reply with nothing but those vile posters that neo-nazis have been putting up but then I'd be posting those vile posters that neo-nazis have been putting up which I don't want to do in any context
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 07:12
|
|
|
I'm almost impressed at just how many poo poo points he managed to load that drivel with, it's got all the greatest hits
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 07:13
|
|
|
"At one level, insisting upon any particular definition of marriage may seem like pedantry." Yer so close tones.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 07:17
|
|
|
i think it'd be funny if tony abbott got run over by a steamroller
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 07:31
|
|
|
Lid posted:"It's a long time, thank God, since gay people have been discriminated against and just about everyone old enough to remember that time is invariably embarrassed at the intolerance that was once common. Already, indeed, same sex couples in a settled domestic relationship have exactly the same rights as people who are married." Those long forgotten days of the 1990's when parts of Australia still had homosexuality as illegal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 07:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 18:46 |
|
|
Found my first no mailer today. Something about how marriage isn't a right but is a pact with god or some bullshit. I didn't spend too much time reading it. I did however have two thoughts: 1) If they just put it in all the letterboxes at my building, I wonder how the old gay couple that just made it through one of them undergoing cancer treatment will react. 2) Are they putting that in every letterbox on my street, is so I wonder how the many Jewish families are gonna react.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 07:34
|
|
