All Eyes on South Australia

All Eyes on South Australia

There are 114 comments on the Blaze story from Jun 24, 2013, titled All Eyes on South Australia. In it, Blaze reports that:

While a federal amendment that sought to give legal recognition to same-sex marriages conducted overseas was defeated last week, a bill to allow same-sex couples to marry was introduced in South Australia, keeping marriage equality firmly placed in the political agenda.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Blaze.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#63 Jun 29, 2013
Time for breakfast.

When you decide what we are actually talking about, instead of some vague wave about "children", let me know.

By the way, are we talking about a tropical or temperate rainforest, a pine forest, a beech copse ... or just a stand of scrub?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#64 Jun 29, 2013
Drop the keyboard, people and go out and CELEBRATE standing up to oppression!



Happy ***P*R*I*D*E***

“REFUSE ALL IMITATIONS!!”

Since: Jan 11

Saint Albans, Australia

#65 Jun 29, 2013
snyper wrote:
Time for breakfast.
When you decide what we are actually talking about, instead of some vague wave about "children", let me know.
By the way, are we talking about a tropical or temperate rainforest, a pine forest, a beech copse ... or just a stand of scrub?
I decided at the outset and left you in no doubt of what I was discussing, here:

http://www.topix.com/forum/world/australia/T9...

and again at your request, here:

http://www.topix.com/forum/world/australia/T9...

That did not fit the agenda that you and I both know you have been honing your skills at for a lifetime, so you seem to have dodged my clarification and have been difficult about it ever since.

When I sought clarification from you, here:

http://www.topix.com/forum/world/australia/T9...

before long you sought to dissipate a simple definition over a vast continuum.

I've already told you, I'm only interested in language here as the average person uses it. If those words are too elementary for you, call it 'common parlance'. Don't lecture me on some esoteric notion of linguistic discipline.

Now perhaps we can stop "talking about talking", and settle instead for plain talking.:)

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#66 Jun 30, 2013
The ADELAIDEAN wrote:
<quoted text>
I decided at the outset and left you in no doubt of what I was discussing, here:
http://www.topix.com/forum/world/australia/T9...
and again at your request, here:
http://www.topix.com/forum/world/australia/T9...
That did not fit the agenda that you and I both know you have been honing your skills at for a lifetime, so you seem to have dodged my clarification and have been difficult about it ever since.
When I sought clarification from you, here:
http://www.topix.com/forum/world/australia/T9...
before long you sought to dissipate a simple definition over a vast continuum.
I've already told you, I'm only interested in language here as the average person uses it. If those words are too elementary for you, call it 'common parlance'. Don't lecture me on some esoteric notion of linguistic discipline.
Now perhaps we can stop "talking about talking", and settle instead for plain talking.:)
Look. I already said that your opening post on "conscience votes" is fine, and shared my legal theory why they are counterproductive and even damaging.

You then moved on into some other statement about "children". I was completely willing to go there with you, but you needed to clarify what you were talking about. You still do.

What age "children"? What about "children"? In relation to what? "Conscience votes"? Australia doesn't elect minors to Government, so how do "children" enter into that discussion?

"The specific is terrific".

voices of reason

“Ruler of Topix Australia .. ”

Since: Feb 12

the Holy City

#67 Jun 30, 2013
"might might

put it in me arse

"

"ok might, but we cant get married yknow might"

"I know might, but a gay aussie can dream right ? ooh I want one of those wild sex offender league players "

oink oink

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#68 Jun 30, 2013

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#69 Jun 30, 2013
voices of reason wrote:
"might might
put it in me arse
"
"ok might, but we cant get married yknow might"
"I know might, but a gay aussie can dream right ? ooh I want one of those wild sex offender league players "
oink oink
Now, now ... you look like a nice couple.

We don't need to know how you like it.
LMR

Moonee Ponds, Australia

#70 Jun 30, 2013
The ADELAIDEAN wrote:
<quoted text>
Probably the most perceptive question yet. Glad you asked.
If I have any barrow to push, it is in regard to that enigmatic Parliamentary beast called a "Conscience vote".
A "conscience vote" is simply a convenient means for a party to either back-pedal from an electorally unpopular decision or to push through legislation that needs to be decided upon in order to remove it from public debate but which most politicians are too gutless to reveal their position on.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#71 Jun 30, 2013

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#72 Jun 30, 2013

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#73 Jun 30, 2013

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#74 Jun 30, 2013

“REFUSE ALL IMITATIONS!!”

Since: Jan 11

Saint Albans, Australia

#75 Jun 30, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Look. I already said that your opening post on "conscience votes" is fine, and shared my legal theory why they are counterproductive and even damaging.
You then moved on into some other statement about "children". I was completely willing to go there with you, but you needed to clarify what you were talking about. You still do.
What age "children"? What about "children"? In relation to what? "Conscience votes"? Australia doesn't elect minors to Government, so how do "children" enter into that discussion?
"The specific is terrific".
You have not convinced me.

Where you're involved I've made the effort to research what I would be getting myself into .

You seem to be a one-trick virtuoso, long and exquisitely drilled in your specialty.

With a much wider range of interests and passions I have no intention of contesting your side of the Rainbow, becoming yet another of your many scalps, in your view if not in mine. That could waste both my time and yours to end acrimoniously.

As I saunter off merrily into the distance you can holler after me obligatory cheapshots about 'intestinal fortitude' or whatever aspersion tickles your fancy. But as I have already told you, I'm not new at this. The "Deerstalker Syndrome" was never my destiny.

Where you are concerned, "my work is done here".

Consider me the 'one that got away'.:)

“REFUSE ALL IMITATIONS!!”

Since: Jan 11

Saint Albans, Australia

#76 Jun 30, 2013
snyper wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =sNoDXH1ZbI0XX
Too late to obfuscate. I understood you correctly the first time.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#77 Jun 30, 2013
What a troll!

“REFUSE ALL IMITATIONS!!”

Since: Jan 11

Saint Albans, Australia

#78 Jun 30, 2013
LMR wrote:
<quoted text>
A "conscience vote" is simply a convenient means for a party to either back-pedal from an electorally unpopular decision or to push through legislation that needs to be decided upon in order to remove it from public debate but which most politicians are too gutless to reveal their position on.
Agree emphatically.

On TV at Parliamentary Question Time when a "conscience vote" is called the sight of over-privileged MPs scuttling across the floor in all directions like swarming cockroaches to vote is underwhelming.

The realization that that swarm is going to plant a restrictive seal onto the self-determination of some large slab of the population is nauseating.

What makes their subjective opinion any better than yours or mine?

“REFUSE ALL IMITATIONS!!”

Since: Jan 11

Saint Albans, Australia

#79 Jun 30, 2013
snyper wrote:
What a troll!
Thank you! Coming from you I take that as a compliment.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#80 Jun 30, 2013
The ADELAIDEAN wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you! Coming from you I take that as a compliment.
Only if one is to prefer process and fluff over substance.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#81 Jun 30, 2013
From the article:

'... Close, a Labor backbencher, opined: "... there are a great many people who, by virtue of the discriminatory nature of our current laws, are being made to feel lesser.”...'

This is a weak tack. The issue isn't about FEELING lesser, but about the National treating some of it's Citizens as if the ARE lesser.

It's interesting for U.S. readers to note that in Australia the criteria for marriage participation are a Federal matter. While certainly a rational approach, it appears that in exchange for greater consistency across the Nation, change and adaptation is retarded. Stability is gained at the cost of unresponsiveness.

“Building Better Worlds”

Since: May 13

Europa

#82 Jun 30, 2013
snyper wrote:
From the article:
'... Close, a Labor backbencher, opined: "... there are a great many people who, by virtue of the discriminatory nature of our current laws, are being made to feel lesser.”...'
This is a weak tack. The issue isn't about FEELING lesser, but about the National treating some of it's Citizens as if the ARE lesser.
It's interesting for U.S. readers to note that in Australia the criteria for marriage participation are a Federal matter. While certainly a rational approach, it appears that in exchange for greater consistency across the Nation, change and adaptation is retarded. Stability is gained at the cost of unresponsiveness.
That is because the U.S. is a federation of states where: 1. The states made the federal government, not the other way around. 2. The states retain a significant amount of their sovereignty.

The Commonwealth Of Australia, is officially a federal parliamentary constitutional monarchy. The past few years there has been debate in Australia becoming a republic as the U.S. is.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 10 min Respect71 51,899
News Doritos makes rainbow chips in support of gay r... (Sep '15) 10 min neighbor 2,008
News Rhode Island becomes 10th state to ban 'ex-gay'... 20 min Wrong Move 1
News Gay Teen Vogue editor defends mag's anal sex guide 1 hr Big Duke 64
News 12-year-old girl comes out to her Mormon congre... 1 hr William P 403
News Gay bar opens near Macon Road, drawing visitors... 7 hr General Zod 462
News Gay couple grilled by judge about their sex liv... 7 hr Frankie Rizzo 40
News Ancient Porn Found at Pompeii May Prove the New... 9 hr Marco R s Secret ... 1
More from around the web