SA Footy

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/gay-marri ... 6212927248

Looks like it going ahead ......

Does raise interesting debates.

Arent they just allowing a conscience vote?

I'm not sure it will go through, apparently there would need about 12 non ALP MP's to support it.

GWW wrote:Arent they just allowing a conscience vote?

I'm not sure it will go through, apparently there would need about 12 non ALP MP's to support it.

Yes I think your right GWW .... But it looks like its getting closer than it has ever been before .

The Liberal Party members won't be allowed a conscience vote.

Guess which way they will be voting?






No, no, no, no, no.......

redandblack wrote:The Liberal Party members won't be allowed a conscience vote.

Guess which way they will be voting?






No, no, no, no, no.......

Yep !!! No go there ... But Julia does not want it either

GWW wrote:Arent they just allowing a conscience vote?

I'm not sure it will go through, apparently there would need about 12 non ALP MP's to support it.

4 I have been told. I think this is a bigger issue than the Carbon Tax. Hope it is voted in. I mean how does it really affect anyone? The only people that seem to object are those that believe in fairy tales. Religion should never dictate law.

redandblack wrote:The Liberal Party members won't be allowed a conscience vote.

Guess which way they will be voting?






No, no, no, no, no.......

The difference is one party has to keep the closet door tightly shut. If there aren't a couple of closet cases in the Liberal party, I'll go jump.

a labor conscience vote would mean more votes next election IMO. Particuarly from the under 30 age bracket. Fair enough there might be some older voters that it puts off but will definitely be a valuable point of difference.

cripple wrote:a labor conscience vote would mean more votes next election IMO. Particuarly from the under 30 age bracket. Fair enough there might be some older voters that it puts off but will definitely be a valuable point of difference.

Labor would probably get the Green vote back from the under 30's.

IMO it will mean little in regards to votes.

Nevertheless, it's about time we stopped pandering to the Christian Lobby and amended the Marriage Act.

Yes, I agree with you, Q.

The ALP are not going to be pushing for a vote on it, yet have amended their policy to state that they are in favour of it if that makes any sense. Its been decided that they will have a conscience vote should it ever be put forward likely by the Greens.

IMO the ALP achieved nothing today except to alienate more people from the ALP. For the Left its too weak, does not go far enough and does not even remotely address the issue in their favour. Hence people that have any real passion over this issue have to move to the Greens to have action promoted over it. On the flip side it makes a statement that the ALP endorses Gay marriage which then alienates many on the Right of the issue and makes it so that they have to have the same opinion to retain their membership.

I don't think that it has the groundswell of support yet in Australia that its proponents claim that it has and I feel its more likely to have done more to alienate people from both sides of the argument than to gain a positive step forward for the ALP. Time will no doubt soon tell!

What i do think is interesting though is how many old school Labor people are enjoying watching the ALP become the bitches of the Greens though. Essentially Bob Brown says jump and they do, none of this would be on their policy agenda if it were not for the fact that in order to retain the Greens support of the ALP the ALP have to put the Greens agenda over their own - Carbon Tax, Gay marriage, Refugee Policy and so on. They addressed the issue today of why the branch numbers of the ALP are plummeting, perhaps its because people see little point of being a member if there is no actual capacity to be a part of the policy process if its simply going to be set by a rival political party?

As it stands I am not real sure that the ALP will ever be in a position again to govern without the support of the Greens in the upper house or even in the lower house. If the ALP continue to preference them they will continue to set their policy in any coalition Government and clearly their policies are not popular and likely going to get them thrown out. One thinks the ALP might have to have a serious think about last preferencing the Greens if they are ever to break away from them and be their own party again. Unless of course the Greens implode when Bob Brown retires - my mail is that many in the Greens don't want Christine Milne to be their leader, so how they manage to paper over that could be interesting also!

Discussed at a party tonight

A mob of extreme right conservatives in Alexander Downerville

All agreed that:

1. We couldn't give a $hit about whether gay marriage was legalised or not, so do it
2. Surely there are bigger issues than this for the Labor conference to spend an entire day debating

I will speak with the poodle this week and tell him to support it - I'm sure he'll oblige

Sojourner wrote:IMO the ALP achieved nothing today except to alienate more people from the ALP. For the Left its too weak, does not go far enough and does not even remotely address the issue in their favour. Hence people that have any real passion over this issue have to move to the Greens to have action promoted over it. On the flip side it makes a statement that the ALP endorses Gay marriage which then alienates many on the Right of the issue and makes it so that they have to have the same opinion to retain their membership.

I think you mean to say it alienate homophobes. Bit unfair to suggest that all 'right-wingers' are homophobes.

Sojourner wrote:I don't think that it has the groundswell of support yet in Australia that its proponents claim that it has and I feel its more likely to have done more to alienate people from both sides of the argument than to gain a positive step forward for the ALP. Time will no doubt soon tell!

You don't think it has a groundswell of support? Think again. From a Galaxy poll:

-62% of Australians support marriage equality,
-A majority of Christians (53%) support marriage equality,
-Half of Coalition voters support marriage equality,
-75% believe the reform is inevitable,
-Labor could get a 7.3% overall swing if it officially endorsed marriage equality; and
-80% of young people (18-24 years) support marriage equality.

Sojourner wrote:What i do think is interesting though is how many old school Labor people are enjoying watching the ALP become the bitches of the Greens though. Essentially Bob Brown says jump and they do, none of this would be on their policy agenda if it were not for the fact that in order to retain the Greens support of the ALP the ALP have to put the Greens agenda over their own - Carbon Tax, Gay marriage, Refugee Policy and so on. They addressed the issue today of why the branch numbers of the ALP are plummeting, perhaps its because people see little point of being a member if there is no actual capacity to be a part of the policy process if its simply going to be set by a rival political party?

The push for policy change has come from within the Labor party, not a Green influence as you suggest.

I guess it's safe for the Bays to go back to using 'a tiger for me' now?

Get rid of marriage all together. Its a pointless exercise and it would mean theres no discrimination.
Bridal shops, florists, cake shops and countless other commercial organisations might disagree though!

Wedgie wrote:Get rid of marriage all together. Its a pointless exercise and it would mean theres no discrimination.
Bridal shops, florists, cake shops and countless other commercial organisations might disagree though!

After my first marriage ended I said "never again", and the lady who later became my second wife had vowed the same.
So, we lived together for 8 years before we made it "legal".

We were married another 16 years until she died, and were happy together.

But, as soon as we married, my new teenage step-daughter, who had been living with her father and grand-parents, asked to move in with us.
Within a few weeks she tried to touch me for a new sports car.
I had planned to get her a good second-hand Corolla, after a while, but I took exception to being pressured.

When I didn't oblige she went back to her father and tried to break her mother and I up.
(I think she had the fantasy of getting her parents back together after 12 years apart.)

Guess who was first to ask about Mum's will and the jewellery when her mother died...
Everything was joint property, so I gave her her mother's watch as a keepsake and nothing else.

Never again...

Psyber wrote:

Wedgie wrote:Get rid of marriage all together. Its a pointless exercise and it would mean theres no discrimination.
Bridal shops, florists, cake shops and countless other commercial organisations might disagree though!

After my first marriage ended I said "never again", and the lady who later became my second wife had vowed the same.
So, we lived together for 8 years before we made it "legal".

We were married another 16 years until she died, and were happy together.

But, as soon as we married, my new teenage step-daughter, who had been living with her father and grand-parents, asked to move in with us.
Within a few weeks she tried to touch me for a new sports car.I had planned to get her a good second-hand Corolla, after a while, but I took exception to being pressured.
When I didn't oblige she went back to her father and tried to break her mother and I up.
(I think she had the fantasy of getting her parents back together after 12 years apart.)

Guess who was first to ask about Mum's will and the jewellery when her mother died...
Everything was joint property, so I gave her her mother's watch as a keepsake and nothing else.

Never again...

Nice!!!!

Marriage a pointless exercise??? gee whiz your out on a limb there!
Society owes an enormous debt to stable marriages, that much we surely know by now.

Besides, i've been to some sensational weddings, a couple of boozy disaster ones too, but that wedding invite is usually very welcome in the mail

Anyone else think Psyber is just a tad obsessed with money?