JBP posted:

Is there anything that accounts for people's vote becoming more right over time though?

fiery_valkyrie posted:

Hastie and Christensen are saying they'll abstain because they want to vote no but their electorates voted yes.

How about doing your job representing your constituents and voting for what they want.

Cartoon posted:

OK so do I have to wait until the legislation passes before I can wear my strap on to the Kindergarten class?

Doctor Spaceman posted:

I dunno, is there anything that accounts for leprechauns?

Lid posted:

Its frustrating and also unsurprising, and again it lends into the real awkwardness of these areas are the most multicultural areas of Sydney and the poorest. Also shows how successful the right has been in courting them with their original base of hardline Catholics and Protestants simply dying from old age and atheism being more common, their numbers bolstered by non-English speaking Christians and Muslims.

You Am I posted:

It's surprising how many representatives go against their electorate's views, be it marriage equality, renewables, etc.

fiery_valkyrie posted:

Hastie and Christensen are saying they'll abstain because they want to vote no but their electorates voted yes.

MikeJF posted:

I don't really know that 'poorest' has much to do with it, to be honest. It's like in Melbourne - the only 'no' electorate was Bruce, which is 50% first-generation and over 45% ESL. It's also rich as gently caress. But really, the big takeaway from this is that we really need to get onto bridging the cultural gap and making up for lost time on the astroturfing that the right has been doing into the immigrant communities.

You Am I posted:

It's surprising how many representatives go against their electorate's views, be it marriage equality, renewables, etc.

JBP posted:

Mmmm yes a longitudinal study of voter attitudes would be the same as investigating mythical creatures. I agree. Great post.

JBP posted:

Calwell voted no and it's all poors/immigants

fiery_valkyrie posted:

Hastie and Christensen are saying they'll abstain because they want to vote no but their electorates voted yes.

How about doing your job representing your constituents and voting for what they want.

MikeJF posted:

Did they? Okay.

But yeah. I stand by that I don't really think it was 'poors'.

Don Dongington posted:

There's no evidence that actually happens

JBP posted:

Mmmm yes a longitudinal study of voter attitudes would be the same as investigating mythical creatures. I agree. Great post.

Don Dongington posted:

Maybe we should stop trying to pin the no vote onto a specific cultural or ethnic demographic and just get on with watching the Liberal Party eat itself.

MikeJF posted:

I'm not really wanting to blame, just really concerned that it's a demographic that's been largely ignored and neglected by the left and we need to make concerted efforts to outreach and make inroads fast.

You Am I posted:

It's surprising how many representatives go against their electorate's views, be it marriage equality, renewables, etc.

MikeJF posted:

I'm not really wanting to blame, just really concerned that it's a demographic that's been largely ignored and neglected by the left and we need to make concerted efforts to outreach and make inroads fast.

freebooter posted:

Most Australians vote for a party and would have no idea who their MP is.

rapeface posted:

Surely the correlation is with religion, not immigration?

JBP posted:

This is what I was wondering about and whether there was anything that might have even vaguely outlined changes in perspective in age groups.

Don Dongington posted:

If you haven't met your MP and taken the opportunity to speak to them and find out what they're about then they're either a snooty Liberal front bencher who charges for access, or you're doing democracy wrong.

freebooter posted:

Lol take the tiny percentage of Australians who know who their MP is and you'll find an even slimmer percentage have ever bothered to try to communicate with them (I certainly haven't, apart from having him block me on twitter)

quote:

Christian couple vow to divorce if same-sex marriage is legalised.

A Canberra couple have vowed to get a divorce, ending their "sacred" 10-year union, if Australia allows same-sex couples to legally marry.

Nick Jensen and his wife Sarah believe widening the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples threatens the sacred nature of the union and leaves the door open to polygamy.

The Christian couple have been happily married for over a decade, have no intention of separating and hope to have more children. For all intents and purposes they have a healthy marriage.

But in a novel protest against any successful move to legalise same sex-marriage in Australia, Mr Jensen wrote in an article published in Canberra CityNews on Wednesday that they are prepared to divorce.

"My wife and I, as a matter of conscience, refuse to recognise the government's regulation of marriage if its definition includes the solemnisation of same sex couples," said Mr Jensen, who is director of the Lachlan Macquarie Institute, which partners with the Australian Christian Lobby to offer scholarships designed to develop a Christian worldview and foster leaders in government policy.

Mr Jensen told Fairfax Media that he and his wife entered into their marriage "as a fundamental order of creation, part of God's intimate story for human history, man and woman, for the sake of children, faithful and for life".

"And so, if later on in the year the state does go ahead and changes the definition of marriage and changes the terms of that contract then we can no longer partake in that new definition unfortunately," he said.

Legalising same-sex marriage would undermine "our most sacred institution, and have serious consequences for children who would grow up without a mother or father," Mr Jensen said.

Buzzfeed posted:

The “yes” vote still doesn’t justify the survey: Tanya Plibersek
Deputy Labor leader Tanya Plibersek was at the Sydney event. She told BuzzFeed News she feels “just absolutely delighted” by the "overwhelming" result, but added the debate has been difficult for many.

Responding to a question on her gay and lesbian colleagues in the parliament, Plibersek said: “I think the debate has been really hard for lots of people in the Australian community."

“It is very hard to be as high profile as Penny Wong, for example, and to receive the threats, the hate mail, the judgement of her life and her family., But I don’t feel most sorry for Penny Wong. I have felt most sad for those teenagers isolated in their families, ashamed to tell their friends, having their relationships and their same-sex attraction discussed by the Australian community.”

Asked if the “yes” vote justified all that, Plibersek said a firm “no”.

“This survey was never justified … The cost is not justified and the hurt, the hurt will never be justified.”

snoremac posted:

Sorry folks, they're playing hardball, gay marriage cancelled:

rapeface posted:

Surely the correlation is with religion, not immigration?

cohsae posted:

Cartoon posted:

OK so do I have to wait until the legislation passes before I can wear my strap on to the Kindergarten class?