+- 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: SSM Plebiscite - PaulP - 09-21-2017
(09-21-2017, 01:14 AM)LP link Wrote:The reports extrapolates figures from the USA and assumes they apply unequivocally here.
Reminds me of America pointing the finger at Australia and calling us racist!
The figures quoted are seen as relevant and accurate by several local organizations. I think I'll take their word over yours.
"The groups, which represent both the frontline and clinical side of mental health, say a "yes" result will "undoubtedly" change thousands of young lives for the better and avert as many as 3000 secondary school suicide attempts each year.
This claim draws on peer-reviewed research by some of America's top adolescent mental health experts, published in JAMA Paediatrics, that showed a strong correlation between same-sex marriage policies and high school suicide. The introduction of state same-sex marriage was associated with a 7 per cent relative reduction in suicide attempts."
Re: SSM Plebiscite - crashlander - 09-21-2017
(09-21-2017, 01:08 AM)PaulP link Wrote:It's a public acknowledgement that it's ok to be gay and married. The research quoted in the article makes that quite clear.I think you will find that entering marriage has not dropped: it is as popular as ever. However, the rate of marriage failures has never been higher. This is because some societies (like ours) no longer descriminate against it.
Is marriage a dying institution ? I'm not sure that it is, but I have no figures ready to hand.
Marriages among Muslim and Hindus here still appear to have the same cutural stigma against them as they did back in Asia. Many marriages are marriages in name only, as the cultural pressure not to divorce is still overwhelming. That may not be the case forever.
People are taking longer to marry and many are marrying multiple times in their lives. This is quite new. Even a century ago people who married twice or thrice were rare as they only remarried after the death of a spouse..
It also appears that actors have higher rates of divorse and remarriage than the general population. This is especially the case in America, where 'celebreties' marraiges are usually terrifyingly short.
Re: SSM Plebiscite - PaulP - 09-21-2017
crash, that all sounds quite plausible to me.
Re: SSM Plebiscite - LP - 09-21-2017
(09-21-2017, 01:17 AM)PaulP link Wrote:The figures quoted are seen as relevant and accurate by several local organizations. I think I'll take their word over yours.
"The groups, which represent both the frontline and clinical side of mental health, say a "yes" result will "undoubtedly" change thousands of young lives for the better and avert as many as 3000 secondary school suicide attempts each year.
This claim draws on peer-reviewed research by some of America's top adolescent mental health experts, published in JAMA Paediatrics, that showed a strong correlation between same-sex marriage policies and high school suicide. The introduction of state same-sex marriage was associated with a 7 per cent relative reduction in suicide attempts."
In the USA most states require people to be 18 or 19 to marry, are they included in the figures of "teen" suicides, in Australia marriage can now be as young as 16.
The use of the term "teen suicide" is clearly designed to build an associative bridge with the reports we read about school children, but in the SSM debate it's adults using this for political purposes.
How about they leave it out of the debate, as it's clearly an issue in it's own right that needs dedicated and specific intervention of which SSM is only a very minor part!
Re: SSM Plebiscite - PaulP - 09-21-2017
(09-21-2017, 01:26 AM)LP link Wrote:In the USA most states require people to be 18 or 19 to marry, are they included in the figures of "teen" suicides, in Australia marriage can now be as young as 16.
The use of the term "teen suicide" is clearly designed to build an associative bridge with the reports we read about school children, but in the SSM debate it's adults using this for political purposes.
How about they leave it out of the debate, as it's clearly an issue in it's own right that needs dedicated and specific intervention!
Gay teenagers tend to become gay adults, at least they did the last time I looked. Why can't teenagers be interested in and care about what lies ahead ?
Re: SSM Plebiscite - LP - 09-21-2017
(09-21-2017, 01:29 AM)PaulP link Wrote:Gay teenagers tend to become gay adults, at least they did the last time I looked. Why can't teenagers be interested in and care about what lies ahead ?
Are you implying you are happy for LGBTI adults to leverage teen emotion in this debate?
I was surprised about the backlash to the recent "No" ads, especially given one of the mums in the ad identified as LGBTI until into her mid twenties. She attributes finding her current partner saved her life, and she now speaks about about her toxic past.
So it seems that toxic behavior isn't just restricted to heterosexuals, LGBTI people can do it too, who'd have thunk that it might be a human issue!
Re: SSM Plebiscite - Baggers - 09-21-2017
I wonder what it would be like to be someone in a SS relationship and having the, seemingly, entire nation fighting over your right to marry? For some I bet it is very painful as wounds of rejection from certain family/friends/work colleagues/religious organisation, etc ...are opened up and doused with salt. For others, they'd be rapt that so many people are fighting for their right. And some would be downright furious with archaic views of opponents to their choices.
Sad really. So much of this could have been avoided had we not had this little yet highly toxic element in the LP led by Abbott, and Turnbull grew a pair... but that's the nature of slim govt, minute factions can actually set and control agendas and make the majority dance to their perverted tune.
Re: SSM Plebiscite - LP - 09-21-2017
(09-21-2017, 01:40 AM)Baggers link Wrote:Sad really. So much of this could have been avoided had we not had this little yet highly toxic element in the LP led by Abbott, and Turnbull grew a pair... but that's the nature of slim govt, minute factions can actually set and control agendas and make the majority dance to their perverted tune.
In politics you have to know your opponent, it's a rookie mistake for the "Yes" vote lobby to be bagging the participants in the ad without knowing their background. Do you think they were selected at random?
Re: SSM Plebiscite - PaulP - 09-21-2017
(09-21-2017, 01:36 AM)LP link Wrote:Are you implying you are happy for LGBTI adults to leverage teen emotion in this debate?
I was surprised about the backlash to the recent "No" ads, especially given one of the mums in the ad identified as LGBTI until into her mid twenties. She attributes finding her current partner saved her life, and she now speaks about about her toxic past.
So it seems that toxic behavior isn't just restricted to heterosexuals, LGBTI people can do it too, who'd have thunk that it might be a human issue!
I've been down this road with you before. When the mood takes you, you lead all threads into a discussion of your favorite topic, namely political maneuvering and behind-the-scenes skullduggery. Whether or not it's true, it is of no interest to me. ssm is a very worthy issue, and any groups affected by it would have an interest in the outcome. It is completely presumptuous on your part to assume that vulnerable teens are being used solely as political pawns by the evil ssm lobby. They may actually be glad that their are now in the discussion, and that their issues have been given air time.
Re: SSM Plebiscite - LP - 09-21-2017
(09-21-2017, 01:46 AM)PaulP link Wrote:I've been down this road with you before. When the mood takes you, you lead all threads into a discussion of your favorite topic, namely political maneuvering and behind-the-scenes skullduggery. Whether or not it's true, it is of no interest to me. ssm is a very worthy issue, and any groups affected by it would have an interest in the outcome. It is completely presumptuous on your part to assume that vulnerable teens are being used solely as political pawns by the evil ssm lobby. They may actually be glad that their are now in the discussion, and that their issues have been given air time.
Come on PaulP, stop playing the altruistic innocent bystander.
You involve yourself in this debate this because you have a preferred political position!
There is no evil side to this debate, both sides are human, neither side is innocent!
I involve myself because I see contradictions on both sides of the debate.