Go to Villagebet.com.au for free horse racing tips - Click here now |
|
THE POSTAL VOTE/POLL |
Post Reply | Page <1234 158> |
Author | ||
Tlazolteotl
Champion Joined: 02 Oct 2012 Location: Elephant Butte Status: Online Points: 31296 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
List of countries on the slippery slope
1 The Netherlands: April 1, 2001 3. Spain: July 3, 2005 5. South Africa: November 30, 2006 6. Norway: January 1, 2009 8. Portugal: June 5, 2010 11. Denmark: June 15,2012 12. Brazil: May 14, 2013 18. Luxembourg: June 18, 2014 |
||
max manewer
Champion Joined: 31 Jan 2010 Status: Offline Points: 32947 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Russia 2525
|
||
cabosanlucas
Champion Joined: 15 Jun 2013 Status: Offline Points: 7363 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
what have been the poll results in the middle east?
|
||
max manewer
Champion Joined: 31 Jan 2010 Status: Offline Points: 32947 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
No Asian or Eastern European countries, Middle east, Africa, Oceania. Canada yet to join ?
|
||
maccamax
Champion Joined: 19 Jun 2010 Status: Offline Points: 41473 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Could have been voted on by the people , back in February. But NO.
labor & Greens wouldn't allow it . They wanted a certain yes , with enough deviate Pollies there for a yes success. Again this time, so we go to the postal mess . BUT . At least the people who are interested enough will make a peoples choice. That's better than the queer pollies doing it. SO VOTE NO and put the pussy among the pigeons. |
||
max manewer
Champion Joined: 31 Jan 2010 Status: Offline Points: 32947 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Marriage came into being as a stable social and legal platform to bring children into the world. It was never designed so people of the same gender could play footsy, without having people talk about it. I expect the "No" vote will at least run in the quinella.
|
||
maccamax
Champion Joined: 19 Jun 2010 Status: Offline Points: 41473 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
be good to see NO win . Just for the blood that will be spilt by the Mardi Gras hoons. Good when it's over , one step closer to me not having to wear a balaclava when I visit the pig next door. ( I may be whales daddy ) I been going there for years. |
||
Isaac soloman
Champion Joined: 13 Oct 2015 Status: Offline Points: 6085 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
this concerns me more than who marries who. needs to be sorted first. this has been simmering for 200 years....ssm how long?
Second Melbourne council votes to cancel Australia Day ceremony and celebrationsis marriage all its cracked up to be any way? if its a matter of property carve up, make a will! |
||
maccamax
Champion Joined: 19 Jun 2010 Status: Offline Points: 41473 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Your spot on Isaacs . Men should be protected . Marriage should be banned. |
||
djebel
Premium Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Status: Offline Points: 53960 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
It is up to the National Government to promote Australia Day celebrations, Local Councils are irrelevant. |
||
reductio ad absurdum
|
||
Dr E
Champion Joined: 05 Feb 2013 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 28563 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Haaaaahahaha ... |
||
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
|
||
Tlazolteotl
Champion Joined: 02 Oct 2012 Location: Elephant Butte Status: Online Points: 31296 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Marriage came into being as a way for men to secure their property.
|
||
JudgeHolden
Champion Joined: 16 Apr 2011 Status: Offline Points: 11716 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Not to mention the fact that a lot of people choose to get married with no intention or, for example in the case of seniors, no capacity to have children. |
||
max manewer
Champion Joined: 31 Jan 2010 Status: Offline Points: 32947 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
dearie me, many men avoided marriage to protect their wealth from claims on it by the mothers of their children, and the children themselves. But the law has closed that gap with co-habitation laws, and child support laws. But still not under the cover of the more readily accessible Family Law Court. As a result marriage has much less importance as formerly. Seniors getting married, without any prospect of children, is not the main game, and never was. But don't feed me garbage about how the issue of children was not front and centre of the raison(s) d'etre of marriage, in all cultures, universally.
|
||
Tlazolteotl
Champion Joined: 02 Oct 2012 Location: Elephant Butte Status: Online Points: 31296 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Marriage has changed form many times over the ages. Polygamy was once the go for high-status men. We changed the rules. Child marriage was once all the rage- still is in some places- we changed the rules. Infertile marriages used to be dissolved. We changed the rules. Contraception in marriage used to be illegal. We changed the rules.
If indeed reproduction was the purpose of marriage we can change the rules. It is clearly not the purpose of many hetero marriages.
|
||
Passing Through
Champion Joined: 09 Jan 2013 Location: At home Status: Offline Points: 79533 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Can a couple marry in a church without a legal marriage licence under the marriage act?
Can a couple marry without using a church? The religious aspect is a outdated appendage to the legal framework created around children's legal status, property rights and to some extent sexual control. Religion is being used less and less with 75% of marriages performed by civil celebrants according to last years census. Religion shouldn't have any influential say in this argument in an increasingly secular world imo
|
||
|
||
maccamax
Champion Joined: 19 Jun 2010 Status: Offline Points: 41473 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Can we come out of the closet now.
My Chihuahua is legally entitled to half the house. We have been together over 13 years. In her mind she owns the lot. |
||
max manewer
Champion Joined: 31 Jan 2010 Status: Offline Points: 32947 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Laws exist, or ought to exist, in the interests of a smoother functioning of society. That is the only test that should be applied to the wisdom of allowing gay marriage, and if that was a simple proposition, the debate would not be happening. I would say the watering down of the importance of marriage through laws governing property settlement, of long co-habiting, but unmarried people, together with child support laws that apply to all and sundry, is probably a bigger blow to the standing of marriage, than gay marriage is. It isn't that special, and that follows from the relaxation of divorce laws as well. Now gays will get to participate in the "fun" of legal intrusion into their relationships, and you wonder if a silent majority of them, or the smarter ones anyway, don't see it as a mixed blessing at best.
|
||
Passing Through
Champion Joined: 09 Jan 2013 Location: At home Status: Offline Points: 79533 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Watering down or being more inclusive?
This is just bringing excluded people into the current legal framework. It has no effect on people already covered. It is a rights issue. Failing out of touch religious bodies are trying to frame it as being about them, but it isn't, and their attitude just drives more people away from them than the droves already departing or not engaging religion.
|
||
|
||
max manewer
Champion Joined: 31 Jan 2010 Status: Offline Points: 32947 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Watered down in comparison to its former legal standing, as the only arrangement that offered legal protection. Today people can't dodge responsibility, in theory at least, to the extent they once could, married or not. Back in the day, people would look askance at women having children "out of wedlock", and in many cases the taxpayer picked up the tab through "supporting mother benefits", That has changed considerably, too. And I agree it has nothing to do with religion. In fact, I seem to recall the man himself (JC) telling someone there was no marriage in the Kingdom of Heaven !
|
||
Passing Through
Champion Joined: 09 Jan 2013 Location: At home Status: Offline Points: 79533 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Why should it only be different here, and because of the views of one major religion?
The US, UK Canada, France etc have legalised it, the Anglican church have gay bishops, archbishops, gay married clergy. Why should the majority view be over ridden by the views of a minority group, the Catholic Church, because of their powerful political influence?
|
||
|
||
max manewer
Champion Joined: 31 Jan 2010 Status: Offline Points: 32947 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
We have yet to find out what the majority view is, and won't as a result of the "Clayton's" poll.
|
||
max manewer
Champion Joined: 31 Jan 2010 Status: Offline Points: 32947 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
It should have been placed in the hands of Roy Morgan, for a whole lot less $, or done properly, but the stuff-up experts in Canberra have denied us that option.
|
||
Passing Through
Champion Joined: 09 Jan 2013 Location: At home Status: Offline Points: 79533 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
That is the whole point It should have been a binding referendum with a simple yes or no question on the HOR ballot paper at last years federal election. Again it wasn't because it is designed to get a situation that can fail
|
||
|
||
max manewer
Champion Joined: 31 Jan 2010 Status: Offline Points: 32947 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I am quite happy for it to be in a form that can fail. Or succeed ! SO long as it is clear, and the result binding.
|
||
Dr E
Champion Joined: 05 Feb 2013 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 28563 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
PT,Let's change the gun laws too ... "why should it only be different here"
|
||
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
|
||
Passing Through
Champion Joined: 09 Jan 2013 Location: At home Status: Offline Points: 79533 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
We aren't
|
||
|
||
max manewer
Champion Joined: 31 Jan 2010 Status: Offline Points: 32947 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I heard a horrible, but true story, about a woman who was almost expired, leaving her estate to a neighbour, on condition he provide care and comfort to her beloved dog. Upon her death, and inheriting the money, he promptly took the dog to the pound, and in quick time, the bookies relieved him of the money. What a maggot ! |
||
Whale
Champion Joined: 01 Jun 2009 Location: St Kilda Beach Status: Offline Points: 38719 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
well we know you don't like dogs Max, how much money did you lose ?
|
||
max manewer
Champion Joined: 31 Jan 2010 Status: Offline Points: 32947 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
A better question, how many times have you been banned here, and why do you keep slinking back ? |
||
Post Reply | Page <1234 158> |
Tweet |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |