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 > Could Australia’s gay marriage debate be the next revolt against the establishment? > Comments

Could Australia’s gay marriage debate be the next revolt against the establishment? : Comments

By Lyle Shelton, published 21/11/2016

Blowing up the plebiscite was never about protecting vulnerable gays from Christian hate merchants, it was about making sure the issue did not find its way into the hands of ordinary people who might not do as they are told.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 17
  7. 18
  8. 19
  9. Page 20
  10. 21
  11. 22
  12. 23
  13. ...
  14. 42
  15. 43
  16. 44
  17. All
Hi there A.J.PHILIPS...

What ! Are you having a lend of me, eh ! I've never heard of such a mouthful when it comes to a simple acronym - it's little wonder the title is consigned to an assemblage or cluster of letters? Anyway thanks for that, I'm afraid I'm well behind the pace of things when it comes to the use of modern lingo.

You know, having read much of what you've written, it might surprise you that some of it, in principle at least, I agree with. The difference between us, I'm totally pragmatic, whereas you're very much a theoretician. And in general terms never the twain shall meet, though there is some common ground, where exactly is beyond me.

What's always triggered my bristles A.J.PHILIPS, apart from my personal enmity of you, is your intransigence in what you say is 'always right'. And you strongly assert that position by employing an immense reservoir of academic argument that tends to leave the reader profoundly stunned. To a point they stagger from the Forum in a daze, feeling as they've done 10 rds with 'Iron' Mike TYSON.

Whereas words are just that, mere words. It's personal opinions, experiences, our own and others views, that's the stuff of sound argument! We might quote 'Lord Muck' in the House of Lords occasionally, giving us his learned opinion and that's all very nice. However it's not him we wish to hear, it's yours or mine or someone else, that's who's opinion we wish to know, not some dreary Lord a century past. Thanks again for defining the acronym.
Posted by o sung wu, Wednesday, 7 December 2016 10:41:56 AM
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
minotaur:

“As it stands it is not illegal for same sex couples to get married and same-sex couples can and do have marriage ceremonies in Australia. Others get married either overseas or in embassies on Australian territory. The friends and relatives of such couples recognise them as married and often they have a marriage certificate. The only entity that does not recognise the marriage is the Marriage Act.”

Why would you care that friends and relatives and governments recognise you as married? What difference does it make to the quality of your relationship? Your relationship is what it is no matter what others say that it is. Only couples who were insecure about their own relationship would need the affirmation of others. Recognition changes nothing.
Posted by phanto, Wednesday, 7 December 2016 10:56:03 AM
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
Missed the point completely there phanto. Try reading my comment again and get a better understanding of what it says.
Posted by minotaur, Wednesday, 7 December 2016 11:00:53 AM
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
minotaur:

Well perhaps you can help me? Any fool can just blame the lack of comprehension on the reader. If I am so dull then why bother even replying to me?
Posted by phanto, Wednesday, 7 December 2016 11:40:04 AM
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
When a respondent to a comment deliberately uses a quote out of context then they demonstrate they did not comprehend what the original comment was about. Should you want to be regarded as a dullard of that sort then don't let me stop you phanto.
Posted by minotaur, Wednesday, 7 December 2016 11:47:18 AM
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
minotaur:

So if I did not comprehend then why have you bothered to tell me that I did not comprehend –twice! Either you want me to comprehend because what you said was important – in which case you would seek to clarify what you said – or you would judge me to be incapable of comprehending and so not bother replying to me. Which is it? Perhaps you should put up or shut up!
Posted by phanto, Wednesday, 7 December 2016 12:05:53 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 17
  7. 18
  8. 19
  9. Page 20
  10. 21
  11. 22
  12. 23
  13. ...
  14. 42
  15. 43
  16. 44
  17. All

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