The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Thoughts on the plebiscite > Comments

Thoughts on the plebiscite : Comments

By Michael Thompson, published 24/8/2016

Opposition to a plebiscite basically assumes that the public will vote against gay marriage, so a plebiscite shouldn't be held because the public have no rights in this matter.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 18
  10. 19
  11. 20
  12. All
Thanks for the false dichotomy, Mr. Thompson.

<<Either they retreat from their calls for same-sex marriage or they stop telling us that they are concerned.>>

There are three main fallacies committed by those against same-sex marriage: the Appeal to Nature, the Argumentum ad antiquitatem, and the Slippery Slope, the last of which JBowyer was quick to get in there. But I don’t think I’ve seen the false dichotomy committed in this debate before.

The main argument against a plebiscite (which you have failed to present accurately), is that the inevitable public debate in the lead up to the plebiscite will result in increased mental health problems for gay people (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3682466), as has been the case in other countries that put the vote to the people, because it will give bigots and hate preachers a podium.

But no, conservatives will continue to assert that those for marriage equality are scared of a result that polling since 2004 consistently suggests will not eventuate.

<<If it is a concern then such concern can be easily placated by not pursuing the question of same-sex marriage.>>

Or they could just vote on it in parliament and avoid or greatly reduce the damage.

Suggesting that gay people just drop the issue as an option ignores the deleterious effects of inequality and is about as dumb as it gets.

--

ttbn,

How is same-sex marriage a “blow to civilised society”? You’ve never justified your claims along these lines before.

<<Those opposing a plebicite are not democratic in the slightest, and they are not really sure of their position.>>

Clearly you haven’t heard the arguments against a plebiscite then. That doesn’t surprise me. Michael Thompson’s article certainly wasn't going to be of much assistance in that regard. Moreover, I’m sure you don’t complain about all the other issues that parliament decides on without asking us to vote on it. What’s so different in this case?

What is undemocratic, however, is having the public vote on an issue, only for the government to be told that they can ignore it (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-24/election-2016-coalition-mps-can-vote-against-gay-marriage/7540988). I don’t recall you complaining much about that.
Posted by AJ Philips, Wednesday, 24 August 2016 2:44:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The MPs promoting so-called same-sex marriage claimed that it should go to a conscience vote in parliament, as 'polls' allegedly show some 70% of voters are in favour of changing the marriage definition.

If the MPs are so confident of the level of support, they should have no problem with holding a plebiscite to test the veracity of the support.
Posted by Raycom, Wednesday, 24 August 2016 3:17:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I see nothing in my post that is racist! Just over VIP English elitists, who believe that they and their opinions are God's gift to the antipodeans!

I'd be more encouraged to listen, if Britain had a better history and stood out as a beckon of eonomic and cultural harmonic success!

Gone are the shipbuilding yards of the Clyde and an automotive industry etc, that once exported motor cars to the world. Destroyed by the infamous British disease and the layabout lard asses, who personified it so well!

Gone is the bowler and brolly and fair minded, good natured tolerance? Replaced by ill mannered abusive beer swilling bullies and soccer hooligans, who seem unable to have a civilized discussion! And go ballistic and rattle the cage, when they're forced to see themselves through other eyes?

I draw your attention to the entirely unnecessary and uncalled for labeling from former posters, who had nothing worthwhile to add to the discussion! Just mouth froth and bile?
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Wednesday, 24 August 2016 4:57:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The best way to have a plebiscite or referendum is to firstly form a citizen's assembly to decide if the plebiscite or referendum is necessary.

If the citizen's assembly decides that the plebiscite or referendum is necessary, then they, or another citizen's assembly decides on the question to be asked, and decides on what information is given to the public.

For example, a citizen's assembly decides what information is officially given to the public to help them decide Yea or Nay.

Running citizen's assemblies would be highly cost effective, and far more democratic than handing everything to politicians and political parties.

The derailing of the Australian republic referendum in 1999 by John Howard shows that a plebiscite or referendum could well be a waste of money if politicians and political parties are allowed to set the questions to be asked in the plebiscite or referendum.

Or if politicians and political parties are allowed any input in how a plebiscite or a referendum should be run.
Posted by interactive, Wednesday, 24 August 2016 5:12:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pompete: It is my understanding that, given 'the Drum' and such sources, the vast majority of Australians are completely 'on board' with the whole thing, 85% of surveyed people are in favour, the Poll results all say so. So why the objection to a plebiscite? It's a 'shoe in'.

Yes, the Gay Community have been banging on about 85% of Australian are in favour of Gay Marriage forever. What in Heavens name are they worried about. If they are correct the Gay Marriage dispute will be over in an instant & they will get their way.

Then again, just where have they been doing their Polls? Most likely in Gay Bars on a Friday & Saturday Night.

The most likely Question to be asked has been leaked already. Should Gay Marriage be legalized? or, Should Same-Sex Marriage be Legalized?

Now they are saying the Question put this way is divisive. Eh? How? It's straight forward. No double Dutch. Anything longer than one clear concise sentence is devises. I don't see anything devises in either of those two sentences.
Posted by Jayb, Wednesday, 24 August 2016 5:29:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I've said it before and I'll say it again, and that's despite all the criticism and abuse that gets thrown my way ! Homosexual behaviour, notwithstanding how you cut it, is basically sodomy, and those who practice it, are sodomites ! When I first joined the job back in mid 1960's, Long Bay had an entire wing dedicated to housing these sodomites, and they were officially described as 'non associates'.

That said, I don't believe anyone whatever it is they practice in the privacy of their bedroom should suffer any overt discrimination. But it would now seem they're no longer content having their sexual practices deemed lawful and 'natural', they want the whole nine yards, proper marriage, with all the vows and other 'stuff' that comes with the union of an adult man and an adult woman.

Why not go the whole hog eh ? Lets lock up all the 'straight' people out there, and legislate to make natural sexual intercourse, between a man and a woman, a crime ! What a bloody good idea - do I have an aversion to homosexual behaviour ? Absolutely !
Posted by o sung wu, Wednesday, 24 August 2016 5:37:08 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 18
  10. 19
  11. 20
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy