Same Sex Marriage Debacle.

[J o h n S m i t h]

They can already MARRY ....!

rubbish ... they cannot legally marry in this country.

[J o h n S m i t h]

Really?
You said it would cost money.
I agreed.
labor and fools say its a waste of money. I disagree and I gave many reasons why its not.
My arguments aren't failing

of course it's a waste of money ... spending millions on doing something that can be done without spending millions is the very definition of wasting money. You arguments don't stack up no matter how much you tell yourself they do.

[Neferti]

They can already MARRY ....!

rubbish ... they cannot legally marry in this country.

"They" were able to get "married" in the ACT (briefly) apparently.

In December 2013, the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) passed legislation which briefly legalised same-sex marriage within the territory,[4] prompting the Federal Government to launch a constitutional challenge in the High Court. The High Court struck down the ACT legislation on the basis that the law was inconsistent with federal legislation, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman.[5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recogniti ... _Australia

[J o h n S m i t h]

"They" were able to get "married" in the ACT (briefly) apparently.

and the feds had a hissy fit and changed it. It didn't last long. I think the northern territory may have looked at that at the time to.

[Outlaw Yogi]

I think Gay marriage should be disallowed because it's "culturally insensitive" to the majority of the population.
But then that's the point of it, to be offensive to normal people. Because homofuxuals take delight in perversity.

The only reason the queers oppose a plebiscite is because they know they will lose.
They know the only way they can achieve this perverted agenda is via imposition from the elite.
Which if/when it happens will end up like the French revolution, where all the aristocracy were a bunch of malicious poofs,
and the population got so sick of them they chopped their heads off.

Now if (although quite unlikely) the queers achieved their absurd agenda via plebiscite they'd be safe (legally) for up to a century.
But if/when the perversion of normalcy is an elite imposition, the queers have got about 40 years max before the population
rebels and re-criminalizes homosexuality. And then prospective parents will be DNA screened to remove the genetic defect (homosexuality)
caused by inbreeding ... and soy bean toxins.

[J o h n S m i t h]

I think Gay marriage should be disallowed because it's "culturally insensitive" to the majority of the population.

and yet every single poll for almost the last decade has shown that the majority of people think gays should be allowed to marry.

[IQS.RLOW]

I think Gay marriage should be disallowed because it's "culturally insensitive" to the majority of the population.

and yet every single poll for almost the last decade has shown that the majority of people think gays should be allowed to marry.

Then why reject a plebecite?

...because you know your polls are pure fucking bullshit just like every other lefty squawking point you parrot without the slightest understanding about what you're dribbling about.

So cut the garbage about what it will cost. Leftys have never been concerned about what anything costs. If it's taxpayers money you complain that it's never enough and if it's your own, you don't have enough and whine that everyone else should be taxed more so you can be subsidized for it.

[J o h n S m i t h]

Then why reject a plebecite?

cause it's nothing but a glorified multi million dollar opinion poll that many liberal MP's have already said they will ignore the result off, if it comes in in favour of gay marriage


you can't have it both ways. It's either a conscience vote, or a pleb. But the pleb has to be binding. If they don't want it to be binding then stop the sham, save the money, and give MP's a conscience vote

[IQS.RLOW]

Then why reject a plebecite?

cause it's nothing but a glorified multi million dollar opinion poll that many liberal MP's have already said they will ignore the result off, if it comes in in favour of gay marriage


you can't have it both ways. It's either a conscience vote, or a pleb. But the pleb has to be binding. If they don't want it to be binding then stop the sham, save the money, and give MP's a conscience vote

Nope, can't force an MP to vote for something if his electorate is against it.
Australia isn't the ALP

Though I can see why you run screaming from a democratic vote. I'd would kill your fag marriage dead once realise theres no support from normal people. You do realise theres less than 50000 gay couples in Australia and most of them don't want marriage. It's just you communimarxist termites who are the main squealing bitches about it.

Too bad, so sad, another lefty termite policy dead

[IQS.RLOW]

The left only want the MP vote because they know it's easier to target, harrass, threaten and name call 152 people than 16 million.