Australian Postal Survey on Marriage Law

Well parting from my leftie bias that the ABC may have, I’m quite disgusted by some of the right wing comments made on the 9 News Facebook…
Fire Away!




The first “no” commercial debuted last night and already there is backlash.

1 Like

Wow. So this is the start of what the ‘Coalition’ call a respectful debate?

I wonder if the ad/creative agency insisted on the confidentiality in the contract, perhaps hoping to be paid by both sides of the ‘debate’.

Channel 9 is leftist?!? That’s funny


Maybe compared to Fox News Channel (or nowadays Sky News) and some rabid shock jocks?

so what’s the marriage equality debate got to do with Safe Schools, anyway?


Nothing… except the gays!!! Argh!!! Won’t someone think of the children??? [Sarcasm, in case anyone misses it.]

Don’t look at the facts; just pretend that gay couples can’t already adopt, etc.

1 Like

I love this sort of argument - why are you complaining about BX when AX already occurs? Very frequently used by the far-left. That is, “we’ve made one step in this direction, why are you complaining I’m taking another”.

Erm, maybe because AX was introduced without the broad knowledge and support of the Australian community…

So, now, when people ARE actually debating whether they want the changes to the Marriage Act made, we’re told the debate can’t even happen because it’s harmful. Yet in the future, the argument will be “what’s the problem if CX occurs when BX already happens”. But you told us we couldn’t even debate BX being introduced…how then can you use its existence as an argument that something else should be introduced…

Loony left logic, seriously.


How are you voting @Firetorch and whats your reason for it?

He said in another thread he isn’t voting.

Personally I haven’t been so angry with the political process ever before. This plebiscite is just going to create more divisions and at risk LGBT kids are the ones who’ll pay the greatest price. The no campaign’s decision to make this about Safe Schools is even worse in this regard.


Why isn’t the topic of bullying against LGBT individuals just another topic in the public school health curriculum in Victoria? You know, like every other form of bullying is? (in Western Australia, at least…). Why do we need a special programme for it? Why is that programme misleadingly titled “Safe Schools” instead of “Preventing bullying against LGBT individuals”?

Just think about if the right-wing decided to introduce a “Safe Internet” scheme which involved government propaganda about what is “acceptable” content on the internet…same deal here. It’s not “safe” Internet at all, it’s government stepping over the mark in a field it shouldn’t.

They did. Mandatory taxpayer-funded Internet filters for porn & other content deemed undesirable by some LNP politician. This was in the era when Sen. Richard Alston was Communications Minister and made himself an international embarassment for suggesting the Internet was only used by people for porn.

…so you presumably agree that a “safe Internet” scheme, so titled, would be beyond the scope of government? No?

It was a failure, a waste of taxpayers dollars trying to do something that experts warned wouldn’t work, but the LNP didn’t care about being responsible managers of our money; like this idiotic survey, the LNP were more interested in placating their conservative/religious base.

Sometimes it’s not just ideology about what the gov’t should/shouldn’t do, but what is/isn’t possible or practical (the real world)

So presumably you agree that the “Safe Schools” programme is “idiotic”, when a “responsible manager” of money would simply ensure that these topics are covered in the regular health curriculum (ie the “practical” solution in “the real world”).

Which epitomises everything that is wrong with the political debate in this country right now. The people who make the most noise, are the most offended and feel the most entitled to a view then sit on the fence and are unable to actually take a position on the issue at hand (not attacking anybody here, just expressing a broader frustration).

Instead of being about the issue, these people make it a debate about all the shit around it that does. not. matter. It’s happening every day at every level of government and it makes me want to move to Antarctica.

(irrelevant rant over)


I disagree with that. Everyone is entitled to a view as long as its not discriminating against others. For someone to not vote is quite encouraging considering it is probably against his views but something that obviously doesn’t affect him hence the reason he wouldn’t be voting. I hope more are like that.


Yawn, what a load of silly cliches. I’m not sitting on a fence at all. My interest expressed publicly on these boards is that a free and open debate should be allowed to take place. This is because marriage is a religious and social construct, not a government construct, and as such there should be broad religious and social acceptance of the change (and not simply what MPs think).

Personally, I think marriage should obviously be between a man and a woman. I think marriage between two men or two women is nonsense. I’m not expressing that in a vote because a) we need to keep up with social changes in comparable nations, even if I don’t personally agree with them and b) I’m not cruel and thus don’t necessarily have an interest in voting to deny something to others (even if I do think its silly).

See ya later. :kissing_heart:

Get Connected: Like us on Facebook | Follow us on Twitter