Marriage equality (1 Viewer)

[Queenroot]

String derail guys

 

[Squar3root]

Porn exists for every and every single topic that exists.

Can confirm

 

[Queenroot]

Can confirm

what

 

[Squar3root]

what

what???

 

[soloooooo]

I find it interesting that the pro homosexual marriage lobby groups are afraid of a plebiscite and the public having their say. I wonder what their internal (not public figures) polling shows...

 

[Paradoxica]

I find it interesting that the pro homosexual marriage lobby groups are afraid of a plebiscite and the public having their say. I wonder what their internal (not public figures) polling shows...

I'm not sure why they are. There is definitely more than 50% in support.

 

[Rouz]

I find it interesting that the pro homosexual marriage lobby groups are afraid of a plebiscite and the public having their say. I wonder what their internal (not public figures) polling shows...

Nobody is afraid of a plebiscite. We don't want a plebiscite because it's a waste of time and money and it serves no purpose.

Everybody knows what the public wants. Mr Turnbull knows what the public wants because they wanted him when he was progressive. May I remind you that one of the many forgotten promises that Turnbull made was marriage equality? However, the PM doesn't want to give what the people want to them because if he does, his conservative party will oust him, and he doesn't want that.

So what does he do? He decides to hold a plebiscite instead. Gays will be heard, conservatives will have their say. Win-win for everybody, right? NO! People realised how stupid of an idea this is and that it serves no purpose other that keeping the greedy PM on top.

 

[soloooooo]

Then if you are both right (I;m not sure you are) then a plebiscite will easily get up and settle the matter.

 

[dan964]

I'm not sure why they are. There is definitely more than 50% in support.

is that just an assertion? it may be that 50% of the government is in support, but what about the people?

secondly, I don't get the point of Kolmias' comment anyway...
any argument that results to sledging is not great...

 

[wannaspoon]

I have no qualms about marriage equality... It's more the impositions that people try to peddle on others that distresses me more... For instance, a marriage celebrant in the US was imprisoned for refusing to grant marriages to same sex couples... That in anyone's mind is a bit excessive and is unfortunately where this debate usually takes us, due to so called "progressives..."

It's one thing to have a the right to do something, it's another thing to put demands on others with the expectation of fulfilment...

To add to why the LGBTI community is afraid of a plebiscite is pretty easy to understand, It's much easier to twist the hand of a couple of hundred members of parliament and staff, then it is a whole country... (Quite frankly, any lobby group would be daunted by the notions of a plebiscite...)

 

[Queenroot]

I have no qualms about marriage equality... It's more the impositions that people try to peddle on others that distresses me more... For instance, a marriage celebrant in the US was imprisoned for refusing to grant marriages to same sex couples... That in anyone's mind is a bit excessive and is unfortunately where this debate usually takes us, due to so called "progressives..."

It's one thing to have a the right to do something, it's another thing to put demands on others with the expectation of fulfilment...

To add to why the LGBTI community is afraid of a plebiscite is pretty easy to understand, It's much easier to twist the hand of a couple of hundred members of parliament and staff, then it is a whole country... (Quite frankly, any lobby group would be daunted by the notions of a plebiscite...)

Imprisoning was a bit harsh but and idk about the sentencing laws there, but she was not doing her job, so she should be ready to face consequences.

 

[soloooooo]

Labor voted against it this week...

 

[wannaspoon]

Imprisoning was a bit harsh but and idk about the sentencing laws there, but she was not doing her job, so she should be ready to face consequences.

So what you are telling me is (I'll give it to you in a hypothetical):
- If I a Muslim was working in a meat processing plant that didn't deal with pork;
- The meat processing plant then decided to tend to pork products;
- They forced the Muslim to handle those products;
- The Muslim man resists on the grounds of his religion;
- That Muslim man should be punished? Because the celebrants justification was, after all, religion...

 

[Queenroot]

So what you are telling me is (I'll give it to you in a hypothetical):
- If I a Muslim was working in a meat processing plant that didn't deal with pork;
- The meat processing plant then decided to tend to pork products;
- They forced the Muslim to handle those products;
- The Muslim man resists on the grounds of his religion;
- That Muslim man should be punished? Because the celebrants justification was, after all, religion...

It's a job, you have to do it.

 

[Queenroot]

If it was that easy to get an exemption then everyone would be doing it.

 

[wannaspoon]

It's a job, you have to do it.

I don't think you quite understand how authoritarian that sounds...

In that case, hypothetically, again...

A member of the SS had to escort a Jewish person to the gas chambers because that was his job...

 

[Rouz]

I don't think you quite understand how authoritarian that sounds...

Handling pork directly and negatively affects the Muslim employee and it is a legitimate religious concern. Gay marriage does not directly and negatively affect the religious and the sects.

Of course, you can claim that it does based on evidence and appropriate points of argument.

 

[wannaspoon]

Handling pork directly and negatively affects the Muslim employee and it is a legitimate religious concern. Gay marriage does not directly and negatively affect the religious and the sects.

Of course, you can claim that it does based on evidence and appropriate points of argument.

Ben is becoming my go to guy for this bullshit...

 

[Rouz]

Ben is becoming my go to guy for this bullshit...

See, when a secular government extends the right of ceremonial marriage to gay people, it shall no longer be seen as something odd or an option in the eye of the religious person in the workplace. That's how secular governments work. You don't want something like that to happen, you move to one of the numerous countries in the Middle East.

I don't believe that a church should be forced to celebrate gay marriage, since that is not government territory and the church is free to think whatever they like. But if you're a government celebrant then tough luck! If you're a florist or baker, tough luck! Because if you choose to deny service to people because of their sexual orientation, then you are already committing the offence of discrimination which has long existed and is outside the issue of gay marriage.

 

[wannaspoon]

See, when a secular government extends the right of ceremonial marriage to gay people, it shall no longer be seen as something odd or an option in the eye of the religious person in the workplace. That's how secular governments work. You don't want something like that to happen, you move to one of the numerous countries in the Middle East.

I don't believe that a church should be forced to celebrate gay marriage, since that is not government territory and the church is free to think whatever they like. But if you're a government celebrant then tough luck! If you're a florist or baker, tough luck! Because if you choose to deny service to people because of their sexual orientation, then you are already committing the offence of discrimination which has long existed and is outside the issue of gay marriage.

You are looking at it from a governmental perspective rather than an individual perspective... A secular government is a government which declares itself neutral on matters of belief... The Secularism that you are actually arguing is that you are saying the government should get involved in your personal life to the extent that it restricts your freedom to practice your religion in accordance with your interpretation of that said religion... Secularism is institutional, personal religious interpretation is individual... It comes down to who's toes you actually want to step on... It is a little bit idealistic to say tough luck, when there is obviously another side which has simply been told, you cannot practice your religion according to your interpretation, "tough luck..."

Don't like it, do your business elsewhere, that's what the free market is all about... (to the florist and baker part of the argument)... The LGBTI community doesn't need to start the Inquisition for the sake of an ideal...