I swear the country will collapse if the no vote wins

I find it extremely hypocritical that the no voters are having a cry when they are being discriminated against for their views, when they have been getting away with discriminating against homosexuals for so many years without much repercussion. 

I'm led to believe the postal vote result is aiming for November some time. At which point I'm led to believe the government vote on it - not sure how quick, and the exact means, of that process.

I don't think it's fair to say they are hypocrites, alot of no voters aren't homophobic, against gays or gay marriage, some people just arent sure what happens next.
Alot of yes voters say that nothing changes for 90% of the population and that may be true but there have been changes or pushes for further changes in u.s states and european countries that impinge on those people. 
I just think no voters want more clarification rather than just "youre a bigot if you vote no" or "gays are the modern black man"
However i will be voting yes, with a little tripidation and if i know someone who votes no im ok with that and would be disgusted with anyone who criticises them for it. 

If someone was to vote no in this postal survey, they are quite literally against gay marriage. They've voted against gay marriage.

There is going to be pushes for changes regardless of what is decided and when (same sex marriage or any other issue in the world). It doesn't make this first step change any less relevant, and we can't be scared of change because we are scared of future change. You fight one battle at a time. We say yes to this change, we may say no to a future change. We're talking about right now, this topic, not future instances that are purely hypothetical currently.

The clarification is there, evident and available. Should the naming of the law be changed from man & woman to allow man&man or woman&woman. There is nothing else needing explaining, and the issue isn't any deeper than that. All other hypotheticals are irrelevant, misleading and invalid. It doesn't have anything to do with Canadian pedophiles, or with the Church (as marriage law is already seperate from the Church). It is clear and evidently about the naming of a single law, and nothing more. 

I openly criticize every person I have talked to whom has told me they are voting no, after having a conversation with them. Because not a single one of them has given me even close to a relevant, valid reason to vote no. Not a single one! If they can't use reason and facts to formulate why they believe the way they do, I will and do criticize the shit out of them. 

Whereas off the top of my head examples for voting yes are: recognition of union when it comes to death estates, children etc. recognition of union when visiting in hospitals. creating of jobs across the nation. giving homosexuals the human rights that every hetero has. EDIT: added point, i also read teenage suicide rates in the LGBT community has drastically gone down in countries that have voted yes.

And guess what, I have not seen, read or heard a SINGLE individual point from the no voters that even comes close to ANY of those points. So yes, I criticize their completely baseless, and harmful, views. If they could formulate an actual argument, I like to think I'm level-headed enough to listen to, assess, and recognize even some of their arguments. But I'm yet to see one. And it just scares me that there are so many people with a completely baseless belief. 

I can't disagree with most of what you're saying. 

What i can say just from my personal experience is that had the yes vote not been so militant in their bemoaning of the no side i think this issue would be so one sided its not funny. The longer it goes on the more strength the no vote gets, people are voting out of spite rather than on the issue. I at one time swung that way even though my belief was that yes was right and i had to remember what the issue was.
To alot of people the yes side has gone from a vote for gay marriage (which is what it actually started as) to marriage equality to free speech and now no voters are voting on something completely different and i can understand why. 

But that argument infers that a no vote is a wrong vote so with that in mind whats the point of a vote. On the news yesterday a lady was fired for expressing support for a no vote. If that's not discrimination I don't know what is.

The idiotic, frustrating part of all this are the religious objections.  They are arcing up because the 'legal' definition of marriage will be changed.  The irony being of course is that no marriage is 'legal' until it's registered with the government through Births, Deaths and Marriages.

That is to say even their own marriages aren't 'legal' until that happens.  So WHAT THE FUCK?

Their other idiotic claim is they'll be hauled over the coals and dragged through the courts if they don't say same sex marriage is OK.

Nothing could be further from the truth.  All they have to say is 'according to our teachings we believe this but in Australia the law says this'.  This disingenuous argument they're running is a farce.  In exactly the same way that a Moslem would say 'well we don't eat pork, here in Australia they do' that is all that religious organisations have to say. 

Their 'no' campaign is very clever.  "It's ok to say no" is a very smart slogan on their behalf.

And on another matter I agree with Rusty when he says some people will vote 'no' out of spite.



And Tony Abbot, what a cockhead.  "If you don't like political correctness vote no"  

Retarded dickhead.  "If you don't like paying for sauce when you buy a pie, vote no"

"If you like Fords more than Holdens, vote no"

What the fuck has one got to do with the other?

There is discrimination from both sides. Eg:

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/4891538/hunter-catholic-school-principal-discourages-teachers-from-publicly-supporting-same-sex-marriage/

The whole thing is disgusting.  No majority should ever vote on the rights of a minority.  

To draw an analogy it would be like stepping back a 100 years and saying we're going to have a plebiscite on whether or not we're going to allow women the vote and by the way, only the men will be voting on that."

It's a joke.

For the people that say this I can only think of 2 possible explanations:
1. They're not really voting no out of spite but they are using it as an excuse to hide their homophobia
2. They're such weak and poor human beings that they can't look beyond their own hurt feelings to vote on the principle of whether to give the same human rights to a group of people as everyone else

Either way I don't have much respect for them.

I'll be voting 'No'

Are you doing it out of spite?

To the same sex marriage postal vote, or the "Did Fabio Grosso dive in 2006" vote? 

It was a foul.

I don't think so.  How can I tell if I am ? 

Oh of course both sides are terrible. Both sides need to remember that we all have to live together once this is done.

I know a few people voting no. The most common trend is believing that we'll open Pandora's box by legalising it. That and if we vote in SSM then the consequences will be dire. It's unfounded propaganda but its something I keep hearing.

Yes it's frankly a ridiculous argument but they fall into a different category to those who say "oh I was going to vote yes but those GetUp/Socialist Alliance/<other activist group> are terrible, I voted no to spite them". 

I don't think you can draw that analogy... there have been alot of propaganda from the yes talking about how its just the same as black/civil rights in the u.s in the 60s. That's a whole different kettle of fish. 

A black much like a woman 100 years a ago was obviously just that. You couldn't hide it, you couldn't pretend you weren't. So you were vilified every second of your life and there was nothing you could do about it. 

A gay person now... is currently not allowed to make the choice to get married... in common society they are not getting lynched, not at the back of the bus or not allowed to own
Property, if they got raped they arent blamed for it.
There are major difference...

Again I'm not for the no vote... but the way its gone is such a bitch fight.

A good friend actually mentioned this as he's on the fence. He saw a yes campaign targeting a church in Brisbane and said "why would I support people who intimidate others into doing what they want, this isn't 1930's Germany." I can't say I'm surprised the debate has become feral, I just didn't think it would be this bad.

I resent having to vote at all. It doesn't affect me and I feel like I do not have the right to affect the relationships of others. Love between 2 consenting adults is love.

And all people, particularly the ones who say it doesnt affect them, have to remember that it directly affects a minority now and for the future. It could potentially affect those peoples kids and grandkids too. It is extremely selfish imo to just assume this isn't important solely because you aren't going to put a ring on the same genitals that you have.

The simple answer to that is, you wouldn't be supporting those people. You'd be supporting the principle of marriage equality. What some group of ferals do doesn't diminish the merit of allowing same-sex couples the right to marry.

She shits.

She stinks when she doesn't shower.

She is massively insecure about her looks. 

Remember that and stop fawning over her...

Now- WGMG: People who feel the need to tell everybody on social media that they voted 'Yes'. Like seriously, could you be any more desperate to virtue-signal how progressive and tolerant you think you are? Hooray, you voted in favour of SSM! Good for you! Would you like a pat on the back or your name and photograph to appear in a big, leather-bound book titled 'People who were on The Right Side of History (TM) in 2017'?

Fracking A. The other night ABC news had a news story about the small group of people who campaigned to make homosexuality legal in Tasmania. Now those are some people who deserve applause. Its much harder to be on the right side of history when your view isn't shared by 90% of people under 50. 

It's almost as if they're spreading the good news..

Well yes.  My mate's Dad, sadly passed on, was instrumental in getting the mardi gra up and running in the 70's (even featured in an ABC doco) when 'poofta bashing' was an acceptable night out of entertainment.

Reached it's nadir in the 80's when gangs used to actively hunt homosexuals and either bash them within an each of their life or throw them off the cliffs at the gap.

Absolutely disgraceful and not that long ago.

Having said that if you want to say you've voted one way or the other that's OK by me.


PS Old mate that's headbutted Tony is a fucking idiot.  Well done flog.

WGMG - Extra Time being deserted and all discussions, especially political discussions, being muted the minute someone shows any passion for their point of view.
This place has been over-moderated for far too long and now is boring as hell. I say short of threats of physical violence, all arguments and discussions should be welcomed.

Hi pal feel free to PM me or any other mod with specific concerns. Cheers.

I agree, ET has been on the decline along with Western culture. I blame everyone except me 

Relevant Betoota article :laugh:

ABS Warns Yes Votes Don’t Count Unless They’re Instagramed With Caption And Emojis

CLANCY OVERELL | Editor | CONTACT

Sending off your same-sex marriage survey response without instagraming yourself filling it in, or placing the envelope into the post box may render the vote ineligible, the Australian Bureau of Statistics has confirmed.

As Australia takes part in a voluntary postal survey on the issue of same-sex marriage. The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) who are hosting the survey alongside the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC), say they are concerned some Australians are not getting fully involved in the democratic process

While, the ABS says some people will be entitled to a paperless option in the survey. Particularly, people who are going overseas, people with disability and people who live in remote communities and Indigenous town camps.

However, for the inner-city post codes, the Bureau of Statistics say that postal survey responses will be accepted but must be accompanied with an Instagram post or story, just to identify the fact that they are being sent of by the most important demographic in the country and therefore twice as important as regular votes.

“What we need our inner-city, university-educated youth to do is let us know they are voting via both the post and social media” says Minister for Small Business Michael McCormack.

“Preferably with the caption ‘yaasss’ or ‘so much yes!’ – that way it’s easier for us to know how important your vote is”
https://www.betootaadvocate.com/breaking-news/abs-warns-yes-votes-dont-count-unless-theyre-instagramed-with-caption-and-emojis/