+- Carlton Supporters Club (http://new.carltonsc.com)
+-- Forum: Social Club (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-6.html)
+--- Forum: Blah-Blah Bar (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-23.html)
+--- Thread: SSM Plebiscite (/thread-3461.html)
Re: Father's Day ad pulled! - PaulP - 09-08-2017
Yes well, in respect of your first sentence, the fact that it may not be real for most folks is in itself part of the problem. I thought as a scholarly summation it was very good, and well worth knowing and reading.
I can't comment on the rest of your post, except it sounds a bit alarmist to me. The thin end of the wedge is the same logical fallacy that is always used in situations like this. No doubt there were some in the past who thought giving any rights to indigenous people meant that we would all end up in loincloths, carrying spears, and eating worms.
Re: Father's Day ad pulled! - Professer E - 09-08-2017
My post elicited exactly the kind of response I expected - I made no reference to anything biblical, I didn't even make a comment against Gay marriage but you people just jumped on me instantly - which totally underlines my belief hat BOTH SIDES in this argument are as bad as each other... if (and I didn't even state any opinion) - IF I had an opinion contrary to yours I'm painted as an anti-minority fascist bible banging bigot....
At this point in time I won't be voting no because I don't see what religion has to do with this and I won't be voting yes because I've had a gutful of being told how to think, vote and live my life by groups, minority, majority or otherwise with all manner of vested self-interest.
Re: Father's Day ad pulled! - LP - 09-08-2017
(09-08-2017, 04:12 AM)PaulP link Wrote:Yes well, in respect of your first sentence, the fact that it may not be real for most folks is in itself part of the problem. I thought as a scholarly summation it was very good, and well worth knowing and reading.
I'm not trying to stir up any reaction, just making an obsrevation about the mix of people in society.
(09-08-2017, 04:12 AM)PaulP link Wrote:I can't comment on the rest of your post, except it sounds a bit alarmist to me. The thin end of the wedge is the same logical fallacy that is always used in situations like this. No doubt there were some in the past who thought giving any rights to indigenous people meant that we would all end up in loincloths, carrying spears, and eating worms.
I agree it sounds alarmist, but unlike the analogy to Luddites you've made, the genetic stuff is based on real research!
There are all sorts of spin on this research, an example is linked HERE all about saving endangered species and letting two males bare a child. The counter research that I wrote about also under way to fertilize an ovum from any source of female DNA. The technique is called In Vitro Gametogenesis, and it allows ovum and sperm to be created from discrete cells of any cell line of the same species. (At least they haven't written about crossing species boundaries, and the researcher is not Dr Moreau!)
Alarmists have written about the possibility of less ethical societies building super-soldiers from hybridisation, and there are rumors some institutes in China has already taken the baby steps, full pun intended.
Re: Father's Day ad pulled! - PaulP - 09-08-2017
That may all be perfectly true, but it is so far removed from two people of equal gender who want to marry, that it is practically a separate topic. That example from China in your last paragraph has nothing to do with a same sex plebiscite.
Not all gay people want kids, and those that do are mostly just normal folks who will in all likelihood choose conventional methods.
Re: Father's Day ad pulled! - Mav - 09-08-2017
I don't care whether you "vote" or not, Professor E. Just give me some reason unconnected to religion as to why same-sex marriage shouldn't be allowed. The whole idea of this dodgy plebiscite is to foster debate. You have the floor now.
Re: Father's Day ad pulled! - Mav - 09-08-2017
You're going off on a tangent, LP. That's an argument about the ethics of cloning, IVF, and research into reproductive techniques.
Re: Father's Day ad pulled! - LP - 09-08-2017
(09-08-2017, 04:53 AM)PaulP link Wrote:Not all gay people want kids, and those that do are mostly just normal folks who will in all likelihood choose conventional methods.
(09-08-2017, 04:57 AM)Mav link Wrote:You're going off on a tangent, LP. That's an argument about the ethics of cloning, IVF, and research into reproductive techniques.
The point I was trying to make was the alarmist aspect of the thinking behind some votes, and how extreme behavior on either side diminishes trust which leads to people making sub-conscious but to them very real connections between disparate events. That is almost by definition the thin end of the wedge thinking scenario.
If the Yes vote lobby want to turn voters, no pun intended, they need to build trust not bully or guilt voters in a Yes vote.
Bullying or trying to guilt voters into a Yes vote just won't work. It's something the coalition and the Abbott's of this world know full and well, they are depending on that fact, and that the media will expose extremist behavior on the Yes side of the argument. It's why so many in politics who are on the Yes side wanted the poll to be deemed illegal, they feel the risk of it failing is too high from the start. The most likely outcome from a distressed or cynical voter is to maintain the status quo!
The Poll proceeding is viewed by many on both sides of the debate as a success, but for the exact opposite reasons.
Re: Father's Day ad pulled! - PaulP - 09-08-2017
Clearly, I must live in some kind of Paully bubble, because I'm amazed that voters actually need to be turned. There seems so little in the way of proven adverse consequences to gay marriage, I'm scratching my head as to what there is to think about.
Re: Father's Day ad pulled! - dodge - 09-08-2017
I, like many others, hate the tone of this debate from the extremes. The moderate middle has been OK.
The point to me that stands out like a sore thumb is that a de facto same sex couple doesn't have the same rights as m/f de facto couple. This is a disgrace and needs urgent fixing.
I think as others have pointed out, there are legal differences (eg next of kin) that need proof in a de facto relationship that are more onerous than a marriage. These can make sense ie a marriage certificate can be shown, but a de facto has to find other ways of proving their commitment towards each other.
I am not sure if it is a simple as saying that the only consequence of allowing same sex marriage is that same sex attracted can get married. As (particularly) religious protections need to be put in place, I am curious as to what other 'protections' might need to exist.
Of the same sex couples that I know, I would be rapt to know that they could get married - it is what they desperately want. The Yes camp needs to campaign very carefully and not aggressively to convince Australia that it is the right thing to do. As the No camp is status quo, it is easier for them as they cater for those that are resistant to change.
Re: Father's Day ad pulled! - Mav - 09-08-2017
We agree on that point, LP. The plebiscite is a cynical attempt to derail the campaign, in the same way that Howard thwarted the Republican push. Say that there should be a debate and use the fact of a debate to drive no votes or abstentions. Referenda have been notoriously difficult to pass where there is any signifiant controversy. It should be a parliamentary vote as it is for other important issues.