To try & illustrate how that’s not realistic, let’s take your argument to it’s logical extension where the equivalent would’ve been saying If you can’t convince (with just reasoned argument) your owner to release you, then shut up and remain in slavery.
1 Like
The yes case already has all the support they reckon, they still shouldn’t need to use violence or intimidation to force others to change their views. We’re in a democratic society and it’s simply turning others away and causing more issues. Here we are trying to tell people that the entire thing is about love and tolerance and peace and then the only way apparently to argue your case is violence or shaming others. How many no voters would have voted yes if this wasn’t the case?
Yeah, but we don’t routinely turn over civil rights or rights of minority issues to a public vote, and for good reason. We elect reps to vote for us, they should do their job.
7 Likes
Which they have done, it’s just it wasn’t done according to the way that some wanted. Then, as I’ve mentioned previously if it was put to a conscience vote, we still would end up with all the violent hatred against those who have the audacity to disagree.
Why shouldn’t it be marriage? I got a fancy certificate from the government for my marriage, why shouldn’t my friends, family and colleagues who love each other get the same.?
4 Likes
A postal survey isn’t a passage of legislation, we live in a representative democracy, this isn’t how it works. This is negation of duties to appease the right wing of the Liberal party, to suggest otherwise is disingenuous.
6 Likes
It’s already been presented to Parliament at least 20 times, these have failed to pass. This has then led us to the postal survey so finally it can be found out what the split actually is since there is quite a split but it is clear that people won’t stop pushing until it passes even if it has been rejected so many times.
And? Divisive legislation gets pushed all the time and has issues passing, it is never put to a postal vote - ever.
2 Likes
So we just keep going then, no postal vote (remembering it only went to the postal vote due to the proper plebiscite being knocked back) and we just have it keep appearing and keep getting voted down in Parliament. At what point do we say that method is a waste of money? 30? 50? 100?
If it doesn’t pass through parliament now, Labor have pledged to do it when they are in government. So they would have a majority and no worries then.
1 Like
That’s fine, that’s a democratic way and I have no issue with that. LNP went to the last election on the policy of having a plebiscite and a lot of people voted for them for that, the plebiscite got shelved but it was still being pushed for to have an election promise broken. That has been Labor’s policy for a while now and that is what they’re heading into the election with so people can make an informed decision when they vote that when they vote, that is one of the policies they are voting for.
This has to go down as one of the only times you’d actually hope the government of the day would break an election promise
How many times would it have to appear before parliament to get anywhere near the amount of money spent on this stupid poll?
The reality is that it’s never going to go away while there is a no majority in parliament. And nor should it, we’ve dithered about on this matter for too long
So why didn’t we wait until a majority government then? Labor had 6 years in government and did nothing about it then all of a sudden turned it into the most major issue we’ve ever had when they went into Opposition. LNP went with this as their policy and that’s what people voted for. If the original plebiscite had occurred in February, it could have been law by now.
If we waited for a majority government to make changes to our law very little would be achieved.
We elect politicians to make decisions - those supporting this farcial arrangement have shirked that responsibility
3 Likes
And they have made that decision… about 20 times. So that led us to where we’re at now. If it’s no, that’s still a decision.
I don’t believe the Coalition have allowed a conscience vote on this issue? I think they have some weird rule where they’re only allowed such votes when in government and not opposition.
Which they are?
Sorry, was replying to @ando9185 who questioned why the various bills did not pass under previous Labor government
2 Likes