Time for a laugh...at the expense of all sides.
http://noblekraken.wordpress.com/2013/0 ... lians-too/
by Leaping Lindner » Sun Aug 25, 2013 6:43 pm
by Magpiespower » Tue Aug 27, 2013 1:02 pm
by Leaping Lindner » Tue Aug 27, 2013 5:01 pm
by Psyber » Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:37 am
It is possible to believe that a party's overall policy and strategy is right for the country even if you strongly disagree with some components of it, and for the party to tolerate that disagreement.Leaping Lindner wrote:It gets better (?) our local Liberal candidate is openly gay and has announced if elected he will introduce a private members bill on Gay Marriage. However his how to vote card has him prefrencing the "openly" homophobic Family First Party second and the Greens last at #9. Obviously a party decision, but come on, how can anyone take these guys seriously anymore?
by once_were_warriors » Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:29 pm
Psyber wrote:It is possible to believe that a party's overall policy and strategy is right for the country even if you strongly disagree with some components of it, and for the party to tolerate that disagreement.Leaping Lindner wrote:It gets better (?) our local Liberal candidate is openly gay and has announced if elected he will introduce a private members bill on Gay Marriage. However his how to vote card has him prefrencing the "openly" homophobic Family First Party second and the Greens last at #9. Obviously a party decision, but come on, how can anyone take these guys seriously anymore?
On that basis, I get on quite well with Cory Bernardi socially even if we do disagree strongly on some policies, and debate them openly at member functions.
It doesn't have to be all heavy emotion and all out war - you can debate and make your points in a mutually respectful and gentlemanly manner.
Despite our policy disagreements, one of which is Gay marriage, Cory nominated me for an executive position at my local branch AGM.
Can you see that tolerance of diverse opinion happening in the ALP or the Greens?
(I used to have similar debates with Alexander Downer over Guatanamo Bay and David Hicks without us becoming hostile with each other.)
by Psyber » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:41 pm
About as much as I do his perhaps, but he does take part in the debate and not just walk away, as do I.once_were_warriors wrote: I bet he gives three fifths of f*** all about your views though in a gentlemanly way of course.
by Leaping Lindner » Thu Aug 29, 2013 8:11 am
Psyber wrote:It is possible to believe that a party's overall policy and strategy is right for the country even if you strongly disagree with some components of it, and for the party to tolerate that disagreement.Leaping Lindner wrote:It gets better (?) our local Liberal candidate is openly gay and has announced if elected he will introduce a private members bill on Gay Marriage. However his how to vote card has him prefrencing the "openly" homophobic Family First Party second and the Greens last at #9. Obviously a party decision, but come on, how can anyone take these guys seriously anymore?
On that basis, I get on quite well with Cory Bernardi socially even if we do disagree strongly on some policies, and debate them openly at member functions.
It doesn't have to be all heavy emotion and all out war - you can debate and make your points in a mutually respectful and gentlemanly manner.
Despite our policy disagreements, one of which is Gay marriage, Cory nominated me for an executive position at my local branch AGM.
Can you see that tolerance of diverse opinion happening in the ALP or the Greens?
(I used to have similar debates with Alexander Downer over Guatanamo Bay and David Hicks without us becoming hostile with each other.)
by tipper » Fri Aug 30, 2013 3:48 pm
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |