Day to Day Politics: And so it came to pass.
Thursday 16 November 2017
And so it came to pass that on the Wednesday 15 November the Australian people voted in favour of Marriage Equality. I shall ignore the fact that the Prime Minister so condescendingly took all the credit. I shall also ignore the fact that like all statistical analysis one can read almost anything into the data at first blush. Hence it needs closer examination.
There are however a few things we shouldn’t overlook. Firstly, the young got off their collective arses and supported something they believed in. Take note, Labor.
Secondly, and I cannot vouch for the veracity of this but I see in the overall vote a percentage that is of protest against the poor governance we have experienced under both Abbott and Turnbull.
Thirdly, we now know that the polling done on the subject has been accurate and worthwhile.
Yes, it was an empathetic win that cannot be ignored. Pity the politician who contemptuously does. And it’s regretful that we had to spend so much money and absorb so much angst to find out something we already knew.
The fault for us not already having Marriage Equality lay firmly at the feet of those parliamentarians who could not find the guts to do what they are paid to do.
Despite Turnbull’s gratuitous remarks it should not be forgotten that the survey originated from Tony Abbott’s plebiscite which was designed to delay. Instead, they lumped it on the public to decide. Whilst yesterday was a unique day in the history of this country we have only hit the line, we are not yet past the post.
My thought for the day
“We dislike and resist change in the foolish assumption that we can make permanent that which makes us feel secure. Yet change is in fact part of the very fabric of our existence. Change sometimes disregards opinion and becomes a phenomenon of its own making. With Its own inevitability.”
24 comments
Login here Register here-
Terry2 -
democrat3 -
Peter F -
James -
Ricardo29 -
Keith -
wam -
Glenn Barry -
Time for Terry -
wam -
roma guerin -
@RosemaryJ36 -
diannaart -
jimhaz -
jim -
BarleySinger -
Michael Taylor -
Möbius Ecko -
Michael Taylor -
Michael Taylor -
Kronomex -
Jaquix -
diannaart -
keerti
Return to home pageHad this vote actually been a constitutional requirement and had there actually been the need for a referendum, it would have required a majority of the electors in a majority of the states (and Territories) to get through : something that rarely happens in Australia. But in this case a majority of the electors in a majority of the states romped home.
Let’s not forget that the Abbott and Turnbull governments have done everything in their power to avoid this legislation going before our parliament.
Time for a very simple amendment to the Marriage Act remove the definition of marriage as being only between a man and a woma. This was the amendment made to the Act in 2004 under PM John Howard simply reverse that change. All this bleating about religious freedoms and protections is a sideshow. The Human Rights Commission is the place for people to go to sort out problems to do with discrimination.
D3 you are correct, but don’t hold your breath.
I noticed our resident grubs Turncoat and his ilk didn’t waste any time milking it for all they could, the only things I learned from the postal vote was the people of this country can achieve their goals if we stand together, and the LNP are bigger parasites than I thought, the hide of that bastard Turnbull to stand up and take credit for anything
As a 72 y o white man, I took part in this vote not to validate it, but to ensure the will of the people as polled was validated. I regarded the vote as the half-baked delaying tactic of a set of gutless LNP politicians unwilling to do their duty as elected representatives. Like those above, I see no win in this for Turnbull and his attempts to take credit, do him no honour. Those Labor members in seats where the No vote prevailed can legitimately accept the will of the majority overall.
Can anybody explain what religious freedom was being taken away from people by the Yes vote.
We sent our children to Sunday School about 20 years ago. What startled me was the Pastor on the Anniversary told parishioners how to vote in the forth coming election. I made a decion afterwards to stay out of Churches as much as possible from that time on.
What a beautiful day, Lord, and it is surely ‘time to pass’.
Sadly, the rabbott’s nasty homophobic fear is still spewing and Terry2 the ‘game’ is going into overtime and we hope the speaker can handle the naysaying arseholes. YES he can YES, YES, YES!!!!.
I like the idea that businesses that will not celebrate gay marriage should be made to advertise such attitude on their entrance, so that yes people can have an informed choice.
Note the churches already can discriminate against homosexual men and against women whether they are homosexual or heterosexual. How ironic if they had to give homosexual women equality?
ps loved the lateline image of the result: Di, the leader of the greenboys, flanked by wong and plibersek.
Certainly, puts bill and shy, in context.
Keith there is a word for RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
oxymoron??? the rabbott et al are not free to think
I loathe the process because of it’s intention and purpose of dividing and delaying, that said however it has so dramatically backfired on the most vocal NO campaigners, specifically Tony Abbott, that I am thrilled with the outcome.
In his electorate returns amongst various age groups were between 80-89%, 84% of forms returned – with 75% in favour of same sex marriage.
Most importantly nation wide it has shown that the tactics of conflation, diversion, deflection, fear, falsehood and derision have resoundingly failed.
This could signal a more important metamorphosis in the thought patterns of the nation
Turnbull’s gloating is enough to make you spew!
The no pollies want any no voter to be allowed to refuse service without discrimination breaches. This is acceptable as long as it is open and transparent.
In the real world every time an amendment to give the right to refuse a service to a gay marriage is proposed an amendment to the amendment requiring any business to indicate their objection to delivering a service on all advertising material.
This must be debated and voted on first if all yes voters would declare formally for and only the negs speak that should shorten procedures, the movers can accept or it goes to a vote, if that amendment then gets up it is included in the original to make a new amendment which now needs a mover???
Why let the no twits obfuscate with impunity. Warringah overwhelmingly yes the rabbott will go with the 26%
I guess this has all been said before, but here goes: the Marriage Act is secular, the opinion poll was secular, civil celebrants were created (I think) to perform secular marriages, any issue mentioning religion is not related.
We need to remove the licence to religious organisations to authorise marriage. Registry office for all, subsequent blessing, ceremonies, etc optional.
Well summarised John Lord.
The cost of the entire piece of theatre is being sent to John Winston Howard as I write.
(Well, only in my dreams)
Daily Telegraph…losers
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/16/daily-telegraph-the-outlier-as-newspapers-react-to-same-sex-marriage-vote?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
If the right wing win government and they could, they might say noway it wasn’t compulsory and spend another 160 million vote to get the same result ah well wouldn’t surprise me in the least.
All in all a good win for love.
Whoever wrote this needs a different profession. It wasn’t a VOTE. That means this statement (the first sentence in the story) :
Is a false statment.We have MONTHS of published articles saying very directly that none of this is legally binding. The story is factually incorrect. There was no vote. There was an increase in hate crimes, an increase in suicides, but there was NOT a vote.
No, they just used the wrong word. Hardly justifies a career move.
If it’s not a vote then every news outlet online and off, and every commentator is using the wrong word.
Verb: vote
1. Express one’s preference for a candidate or for a measure or resolution; cast a vote
2. Express one’s choice or preference by vote
3. Express a choice or opinion
4. Be guided by in voting
5. Bring into existence or make available by vote
Noun: vote
1. A choice that is made by counting the number of people in favour of each alternative
2. The opinion of a group as determined by voting
3. (law) the right to vote in political elections
4. A body of voters who have the same interests
5. The total number of voters who participated
Thanks Mo. Your facts work better than my sarcasm.
Hmmm, even on news.com.au they’ve called it a “vote”.
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/gay-marriage/bob-katter-says-the-samesex-marriage-vote-is-a-big-fat-lie/news-story/61c86ebd3066adff7d59469092beb30e
Do I feel sorry for this pair? No.
Do I think they are a pair of idiots? Yes.
Do I think they’ll make sure they milk their 15 minutes of fame? Yes.
Did I mention that I think they are idiots?
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/relationships/marriage/lawyer-offers-to-help-distraught-no-voting-couple-to-divorce/news-story/4dcaa833c241681533e4ff121e785259
Turnbull crowing that he had delivered an election promise just ridiculous. He hasnt done any campaigning whatsoever, and made himself pretty irrelevant really. Stark difference on the night – Bill Shorten out there celebrating with the exuberant crowd, Malcolm reports he and Lucy “had a glass of champagne, we were so thrilled”.
Jaquix
You nailed it.
No matter how much Turnbull pretends to be a Liberal moderate (oxymoron that such a label is) he remains apart from the people – quietly quaffing champers with Lucy, meanwhile Shorten joins with the people.
C’mon Bill you are doing well, now just apologise to and free the Manus & Nauru detainees – put a halt to subsidising polluting industries, declare a unambiguous stand on mitigating the worst of climate change… oh, and make Tanya Plibersek LOTO – every time she speaks, she makes sense and doesn’t appear to be a little bit fake, which, Bill, I suspect you just might be, not a total fake like Turnbull, but there is something NQR.
For the record, I think there is something a NQR about Richard Di Natali also. Maybe a politician needs be NQR just to climb the greasy pole of politics. I stand to be corrected, but, on a personal level I haven’t managed to survive as well as I have by having complete faith in anyone. Guess that makes me NQR as well.
When is a vote not a vote? When someone is in de Nile. Oldie but evergreen.
Cheers everyone. Australia done good and a little light returned to the world. Now, in my ramble, I am thinking how the light gets in:
“Lucy and I had a glass of champagne to celebrate!” Onc again proof that we have an A-class w==ker as PM