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 > General Discussion > What A Circus!

What A Circus!

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 13
  7. 14
  8. 15
  9. Page 16
  10. All
Dear Bazz,

I'm sorry that you obviously did not Google the reasons
as to why a plebiscite is
being opposed by so many thinking people.

A.J. Phillips has explained things rather well. And I
shall add a bit to what he's stated.

As AJ and myself have pointed out a plebiscite will only delay
same-sex marriage. The last time Australia had a plebiscite
was in 1977 on the question of the National Anthem. It took
seven years to implement the result.

Unlike a Referendum governments are not bound by the
results of a plebiscite.

Voting in a plebiscite is not compulsory and a plebiscite
can be open to political manipulation because it isn't
regulated by strict rules like a Referendum or an Election.

It is not binding on Parliament to make a decision
consistent with the results. So even if Australians
overwhelmingly vote for same-sex marriage it will still
lie in the hands of politicians to actually change the law.

The costs involved in a plebiscite are huge and spending it
on something that may take years to implement, is not
binding, and legally doesn't hold much water - seems like
a dreadful waste.

The High Court has already confirmed that
Parliament can already make it happen. Parliament can
legislate and enact same-sex marriage if a cross-party
free vote is granted.

We already know that Australians support same-sex marriage.
The Liberal Party's go-to research company - Crosby/Tettor
has found 72% of the public already support it. Which is
higher than many countries with same-sex marriage.

We elect and pay politicians to represent us and make laws.
They have done so many times without consulting us.
A majority of Australians want same-sex marriage NOW.
The politicians should stop delaying and simply
get on with the job.
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 9 August 2017 6:47:45 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
It was politicians who created the 'Marriage Act' in the first place, without the "benefit" of a plebiscite. They should be able to alter it without that "benefit". Howard did. Those who want no change can vote nah, and the rest can vote I, I believe the I's would have it.

Malcolm Turnbull until he morphed into Malcolum Turnballs totally ridiculed the idea of a plebiscite. Now he claims it shows leadership. Yeah Malcolm it sure does, but whose leadership.

However, on the question of "Should National Party members be allowed to marry their sheep?" That defiantly requires a plebiscite, or a vote at the UN or something. I personally agree, but I want it limited to four wives at a time.
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 10 August 2017 5:25:36 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 13
  7. 14
  8. 15
  9. Page 16
  10. All

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