SSM Plebiscite

[mateinone]

There's no excuse for it, but i can understand why it happens. And tbh, I empathize with them.

I understand why it happens also, but I don't respect or empathise.
A cause starts to lose people once it loses moral high ground and attacking people and their livelihood was enough to do it for me

[madbluboy]

Well hopefully they win the vote and they can stop hijacking Father's day and my Facebook page.

[PaulP]

I understand why it happens also, but I don't respect or empathise.
A cause starts to lose people once it loses moral high ground and attacking people and their livelihood was enough to do it for me

I think the words and actions need to be seen in a broader context, more specifically in a context of power relations. As I stated earlier, most of the power resides in the conservative lobby - political power, media power, social power, historical power etc. The gay lobby is under represented in all these areas. The fight isn't fair at all. The poo pooing of the gay lobby for name calling needs to be seen in such a context. Bullying is not the same on both sides, not does it carry the same weight, or sting.

If society and politicians had some sense to begin with, things would not have devolved to this point.

[PaulP]

Well hopefully they win the vote and they can stop hijacking Father's day and my Facebook page.

Your FB page must be quite something.

[mateinone]

Paul
Not all groups are represented equally and they won't whilst the distribution in the population isn't equal.
But here is the thing, all polls point to most Australian's agreeing with the cause, but like every cause, it has to follow process.

It doesn't matter if it was equal or not equal.
Because people have been bullied in the past (or now) it doesn't excuse passing that to another person.
As for the 'fight' being fair. You are right, it isn't, but not in the way you are stressing.

It isn't poo pooing as you call it over name calling. It is bullying and it is specifically trying to impact peoples lives for their views. A gay couple apparently come out against gay marriage and was apparently hounded with calls of being homophobic etc.
What if it was to turn into a slanging match on both sides? There is nothing dignified and respectful about that.

Nothing can be said that justifies the attacks on people for their views. It is unnecessary and ridiculous.

[madbluboy]

Your FB page must be quite something.

Sorry not my page, my news feed.

[PaulP]

Paul
Not all groups are represented equally and they won't whilst the distribution in the population isn't equal.
But here is the thing, all polls point to most Australian's agreeing with the cause, but like every cause, it has to follow process.

It doesn't matter if it was equal or not equal.
Because people have been bullied in the past (or now) it doesn't excuse passing that to another person.
As for the 'fight' being fair. You are right, it isn't, but not in the way you are stressing.

It isn't poo pooing as you call it over name calling. It is bullying and it is specifically trying to impact peoples lives for their views. A gay couple apparently come out against gay marriage and was apparently hounded with calls of being homophobic etc.
What if it was to turn into a slanging match on both sides? There is nothing dignified and respectful about that.

Nothing can be said that justifies the attacks on people for their views. It is unnecessary and ridiculous.

MIO, I think we're moving in ever decreasing circles on this topic.

[Thryleon]

Sorry not my page, my news feed.

+1 its irritating me to the point of madness.

The other thing that is irritating me, is the fact that the "no" vote boosters are getting no right to campaign (I don't care what basis is used to justify that, its wrong).

You can't have a proper election by silencing one side so why would this apply in a discussion which is ironically promoting marriage equality?

It seems to have missed the point somewhat and the meaning of the word.

[PaulP]

+1 its irritating me to the point of madness.

The other thing that is irritating me, is the fact that the "no" vote boosters are getting no right to campaign (I don't care what basis is used to justify that, its wrong).

You can't have a proper election by silencing one side so why would this apply in a discussion which is ironically promoting marriage equality?

It seems to have missed the point somewhat and the meaning of the word.

I doubt there are any genuine, legal or other impediments stopping the no voters from campaigning. They probably realize they need to operate by subterfuge because their position is untenable nonsense.

[Thryleon]

I doubt there are any genuine, legal or other impediments stopping the no voters from campaigning. They probably realize they need to operate by subterfuge because their position is untenable nonsense.

Is it though?

Should I just believe you because you are telling me it is?

I dont like being told what to believe.

It reminds me of living in a fascist dictatorship.