ttbn,

Yes, Ayn Rand certainly had a point there. The thought that people of different races could have been treated as equals was once absurd. But now that we know more about genetics, segregation and the unequal treatment of different groups is rapidly declining.

“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.” - Abraham Lincoln

Education is a wonderful thing.

AJPhillips

That speech was made when negros were slaves. Makes sense!
Obviously though, some idiot was proposing negro slaves be treated as equals. What else would be the motivation for such an utterance?

//Ms. Szubanski is a biggish name, and is respected by some people; but if she is a flag bearer for SSM, the YES crowd have no arguments.//

Yeah, she could have prosecuted her case better. But on the other hand, she is only an actor - and she was still doing a damn sight better than that useless lawyer who couldn't even understand the very straightforward questions being asked of her. That was just embarrassing.

I thought the priests did a much better job, particularly that nice Fr. Brennan.

We are supposed to be a democratic country boasting
of our fair-go, our humanity, our love of justice
and yet within our own borders a percentage of our
population are denied the legal privileges of the
Marriage Institution by the law of the land.

According to the 2011 Census there were 33,700 same
sex couples in Australia. About 1%.
However in the most recent
Roy Morgan Research survey we are told that
Australians who
identify as gay or lesbian has increased, and in
2014 the figure had risen to 3.4%. This is not
counting teenagers who identify as being gay or
lesbian. These are the people who will be affected
by what is decided about the Institution of Marriage
in our postal survey.

In reference to Q&A, Maggot Zsubanski, (I am simply responding in kind as I have been responded to by the YES filth). Her performance was typical of the YES backers. Discredit and question everything a NO backer says. Disregard facts or figures just attack the comments and do it with conviction, observers who have no clue about why they should vote NO will believe you because you sound believable. Remember she is an actor? Well if she can lie then she has given me authority to discredit her. Actor? HAH, my arse is a better actor, and more attractive.

Actors have to perform others written scripts!