Hi AJ,

I'm certainly not asking you to 'care' about inter-racial marriages, simply to recognise that they are quite legal and always have been in Australia. They are, and have been, a marriage between a man and a woman. There was never any need to change any marriage law in order for it to happen. Great.

As for my unkind crack how can ' .... people out there who don’t care about these issues make the situation “far worse”?

<<There may actually be people out there ... who don't give a flying toss about LGBTI issues.>>

By not taking any particular notice: that may be the cruellest thing to do, even worse than the odd smack in the mouth, if that ever happens.

There are very serious issues in the world today, so I look forward to the day when people can get over themselves and rise above trivia, and do something useful for the rest of the world. No, not the ME-generation.

Cheers,

Joe

Joe,

I recognise that they are legal and always have been in Australia.

<<I'm certainly not asking you to 'care' about inter-racial marriages, simply to recognise that they are quite legal and always have been in Australia.>>

Why is it so important to you that I do, though? I have, after all, already explained why that’s irrelevant to my analogy.

<<They are, and have been, a marriage between a man and a woman. There was never any need to change any marriage law in order for it to happen. Great.>>

This is irrelevant to anything. Again…

“So are you saying, then, that there does need to be a different word for same-sex marriage because it will have gone from not-legislated-for to legislated-for? Where’s the logic in that?” (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=18439#327726)

<<By not taking any particular notice: that may be the cruellest thing to do, even worse than the odd smack in the mouth, if that ever happens.>>

That’s a good point. I was trying to be understanding, but now that you mention it, I suppose those who don’t give a toss are almost as guilty as the religious moderates who enable the extremists through their passive support.

<<There are very serious issues in the world today, so I look forward to the day when people can get over themselves and rise above trivia, and do something useful for the rest of the world. No, not the ME-generation.>>

I fail to see what relevance the ‘me’ generation has to do with this. This issue, after all, does not arrive out of selfishness any more than equal rights for people of colour did, and would be close to it on the scale of “usefulness”. There is nothing "trivial" about it. I’ve explained why this is the case many times on OLO before. I’m sorry you missed it.

I think *LoudMouth* has missed more than a few things actually.

It is not complicated Joe. Simply, if you care about issues such as discrimination and abuse then it automatically follows that you will care about issues such as those we are discussing.

And what about some of us here? It may, say in my case for example, be that I am not personally being harassed. I am not personally being discriminated against in regards to my relationship, which enjoys the full support of the Marriage Act. My BeLoved will share equally in the fruits of our labour and not someone else and so on.

And some of YuYutsu's earlier comments about there being no bad laws in effect visa vi this topic were so ignorant as to not even be worth commenting on.

So, Joe asks us why should we care and "reminds" us that there are more pressing issues at play that demand our attention.

Societies are judged by some in terms of how well they care for their most vulnerable members.

What exactly is the nature of the moral agency of the author if it supports discrimination and abuse?

It disgusts me that some of the religious bigotry we see in some of the schools for example is tolerated.

Though, I am Heartened to see sensible actions such as the new order visa vi vaccinations, that being the end to conscientious objection on religious grounds.

And Heartened further that the Rights of the Child are being strengthened in ways such as their right to Privacy, say as it is now with the vaccination record requiring the child's consent prior to release.

Much more needs to be done in my view. Verily, the Politicians needs some new "hymns." .. Break free from the Shadows of the past .. Put the bar up a bit higher, and get ahead of the 8 ball.

Posted by AJ Philips, Sunday, 21 August 2016 8:52:30 PM

"<<They are, and have been, a marriage between a man and a woman. There was never any need to change any marriage law in order for it to happen. Great.>>

This is irrelevant to anything. Again… "

..

I would say that there must be transparency. And, there must be peer review. Having that, we ought be able to determine the reasons why the law, as it was in the past, was written in the way it was and if it was based on some of the discredited views akin to those that we have seen here, then what we have in the here and now is an archaic law based on archaic, discredited views.

Let's all shed a tear for the "Pillars of Salt" amongst us, for it is not the strong who survive, but those most capable of adapting to change.

..

LoudMouth, your claim needs to be substantiated. I don't know, but I am inclined to believe that your view about inter-racial marriage as it was historically is not the full story. Australia had churches like some of those in South Africa, or is that not true?