SSM Plebiscite

[PaulP]

Thry, thanks for your post.

To put what you are saying into blunt language, the non religious no voters are voting that way because they don't like poofs and dykes. Whether the dislike is based on fear, lack of education, incorrect information, laziness, social convenience etc. I can't say. Maybe they all play a part. I'm not in any way suggesting that such people are bad, but if the possible reasons I list here are valid, their position on this issue most certainly is.

[dodge]

I agree Thry - ideology is the driving force, which is not easily changed.  I have had some quite long conversations with some no voters, talking about homosexuality as being immoral.  These people are otherwise very good, rational thinkers, who i respect.

[Thryleon]

Thry, thanks for your post.

To put what you are saying into blunt language, the non religious no voters are voting that way because they don't like poofs and dykes. Whether the dislike is based on fear, lack of education, incorrect information, laziness, social convenience etc. I can't say. Maybe they all play a part. I'm not in any way suggesting that such people are bad, but if the possible reasons I list here are valid, their position on this issue most certainly is.

Paul, no worries.

If thats the way you interpret that, then so be it, but I assure you that is not what is intended by myself here, or any person who votes no.

Odds are they actually don't care if someone is gay.  That doesn't mean they agree with it.  It's why people only change tune when family "comes out".

That's when it effects them.  Until that point, they can live in denial and simply disagree with that way of life.

Its only now that they will likely vote no. 

Some will genuinely be homophobic, others will just fail to understand what impact these comments have.


I think I should stop commenting here.  Ive written enough, I don't want to be hurtful, and if anyone takes exception with anything I've written, feel free to call me out on it, and I will happily rephrase and if necessary retract, but its important to acknowledge that the majority of people will absolutely not say the above anywhere that is linked to their real life persona, and I hope that these conversations will not reflect poorly on me, even though I'm a yes voter.  Ive simply been able to write something here that I feel many people never would openly state anywhere and as a consequence the debate is not public.



@Dodge, the hardest thing to change is someone's ideology.  Its linked to the way they see their reality.  This is the point I was trying to communicate with DJC yesterday but failed.

[PaulP]

I agree Thry - ideology is the driving force, which is not easily changed. I have had some quite long conversations with some no voters, talking about homosexuality as being immoral. These people are otherwise very good, rational thinkers, who i respect.

But if this is true, then they're not voting on ssm, they're voting on homosexuality full stop. Which to my mind is playing the man and not the ball, and is IMO, slightly immoral.

[DJC]

The AFL's support for marriage equality has apparently earned a bomb threat from the bullying right  :

[madbluboy]

The left wing nut job that headbutted our former PM has been charged.

[dodge]

Yes, Paul - agree and that to me is where some of the 'argument' is being lost because passages about homosexuality in the Bible are about that and not marriage.

Interesting that there are some Biblical scholars that are talking about the society then no having the sophistication to know about LGBQTI, which makes it much harder to understand when trying to put it in today's context.

[PaulP]

Yes, Paul - agree and that to me is where some of the 'argument' is being lost because passages about homosexuality in the Bible are about that and not marriage.

Interesting that there are some Biblical scholars that are talking about the society then no having the sophistication to know about LGBQTI, which makes it much harder to understand when trying to put it in today's context.

dodge. That's a fair post. So far as I can tell, what the Bible says about ssm and which genders are allowed / not allowed to marry, is at best ambiguous, and at worst, non existent.

The other issue as Mav has already highlighted, is that the church and religion are now completely separate from the legalities and laws of marriage. A separation of church and state, as it were.

[Gointocarlton]

@PaulP I am directing this this question respectfully to you as you seem to be very passionate about this debate however if anyone else can chime in and answer it, I would be grateful.

Can anyone tell me what arguments/rationale (non religious) the "no" voters have put up? I cant say I have followed every debate on this topic as I think its an utter wast of time and money, but I have not heard a single, rational argument that is non religious supporting a "no" vote.

Not trying to be a smart ass here, just asking a question as respectfully as I can. I appreciate everyone is entitled to an opinion, I just havent heard any supporting a no vote.

[PaulP]

@PaulP I am directing this this question respectfully to you as you seem to be very passionate about this debate however if anyone else can chime in and answer it, I would be grateful.

Can anyone tell me what arguments/rationale (non religious) the "no" voters have put up? I cant say I have followed every debate on this topic as I think its an utter wast of time and money, but I have not heard a single, rational argument that is non religious supporting a "no" vote.

Not trying to be a smart ass here, just asking a question as respectfully as I can. I appreciate everyone is entitled to an opinion, I just havent heard any supporting a no vote.

So far as I can tell, there isn't any. It seems to come down to personal ideology / beliefs. An axiomatic position that is seemingly beyond justification or rational discourse. At least that what it seems like to me.