BREAKING:Emergency laws to ban vilification of same-sex marriage campaign brought in

Emergency laws to ban vilification, intimidation and threats in same-sex marriage campaign


>Australians who feel vilified, intimidated or threatened by another person's conduct during the same-sex marriage campaign will have legal recourse under emergency laws being rushed through Parliament this week.

>Civil penalties of up to $12,600 will apply, but any legal action for an alleged breach of the new law will have to be approved by Attorney-General George Brandis.

>"It will be unlawful to vilify, intimidate or threaten to harm a person either because of views they hold on the survey or in relation to their religious conviction, sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status," a government spokesman said.

>Tuesday's Coalition party room meeting green-lighted the new laws as former prime minister Tony Abbott penned an opinion piece for Fairfax Media advocating the "no" vote.

I don't want to live in this country anymore. Why demonize someones right to an opinion?

Other urls found in this thread:

twitter.com/theage/status/907452080171962368
archive.is/gJXo8
archive.is/uzv9p
couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/supporters-opponents-of-same-sex-marriage-clash-outside-brisbane-church/news-story/524f4cf502cb67f26b6934462f6906ef?nk=2d33b02f5c93063edb7b44600d3226ef-1505196729
legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/CURRENT/A/AntiDiscrimA91.pdf
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>Mr Abbott argued it had been years "since gay people have been discriminated against, and just about everyone old enough to remember that time is invariably embarrassed at the intolerance that was once common".

>However, the former PM went on to say same-sex couples in settled domestic relationships "have exactly the same rights as people who are married".

>"To demand 'marriage equality', therefore, is quite misleading. Same-sex couples already have that," Mr Abbott wrote. "This debate is about changing marriage, not extending it. And if you change marriage, you change society; because marriage is the basis of family; and family is the foundation of community."

>The former prime minister also charged supporters of the legal change for being primarily responsible for bullying and hate speech in public debate, rather than same-sex marriage opponents.

>"It's striking how little love the supporters of same-sex marriage are showing for anyone who disagrees with them," he argued.

>Big businesses, from sandwich giant Subway to the ride sharing service Uber, also copped a serve for "virtue signalling" on the issue.

>Mr Abbott concluded by urging a "no" vote to show that "political correctness has got completely out of hand".

twitter.com/theage/status/907452080171962368

archive.is/gJXo8

Nice democracy you have there

Inb4 used against the left

Also in other news, the petition to take down our historical statues. Seen at Adelaide uni North terrace

Literally passing a law to make it illegal to complain about passing the other law

HOLY SHIT GUYS A THING IS HAPPENING IN AUSTRIA

based abbot
Ausbros please reinstate him

Tones dropping truth bombs

>that man is a villain, SIR!
>go to jail
australia, ladies and gentlemen

>illegal to call a faggot a fag

what so they banned discussion of it

what the fuck

miss him so much, he got basically assassinated

How? It's specifically a law that you can't say anything "bad" about people who are gay.

Australia*

Who is George Brandis? Is he an Australian commissar?

It's not passing a law. It's literally a survey. The results of said survey will likely be used to justify changing a law but the survey itself is not legally enforced in any way

They're worried about a bogan backlash. It's not the pooftah's that need to watch out though.

>what so they banned discussion of it
>what the fuck

Yeah. Basically.
Which makes me incredibly confused, if you were going to ban this then why is the other side not banned from plastering "VOTE YES!" literally everywhere you look? Why is it only one side that this law is targeting for the duration of the vote?

ok fine Antigua. humourless people

From what is written in OP it seems to protect people voting no more than the faggots. No voters are the ones getting threatened at present

>in relation to their religious conviction, sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status

You just know this shit is permanent and a giant fucking slippery slope.

Fuck off cunt, don't tell us how to run our country. Go home you yankee piece of shit.

wew, better stop threatening fags boys

Tones opinion piece on fairfax.

Tony Abbott on why same sex marriage would fundamentally change society
archive.is/uzv9p

It protects religious nuts too though
Also if you read the actual law in question it's different to the way the article phrases it

>anal pain 999%

>religious conviction, sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status
don't like the phrasing of this either, they're obviously hoping for a christianity vs melbourne situation and are going to shit on everyone else

This thread is full of fucking retards.

This law specifically and exclusively protects no voters.

"BWAAAAAH?" I hear you say. But shut the fuck up and listen. It was already unlawful to intimidate or harass someone on the basis of their sexuality. Gays are already a protected class and have been for a long time. This law does not protect gays any more than they already were. In fact, it does the opposite. It means that everyone has the same protection of their views that gays have enjoyed, because instead of making it unlawful to bully on the basis of sexual orientation it makes it unlawful to bully on the basis of someone's views on the same-sex marriage survey.

You are all knee-jerk reactionaries with no understanding of fucking anything and I hope you all fucking die.

P.S. I'm voting no.

Which is why I want to vote no.

I personally have zero issues with people who are gay, I've known plenty and never had any problem. The issue comes along when gay marriage will erode traditional values in society and it will lead to other stupid shit like endorsing 100,000 different genders, otherkin and all the other marxist bullshit.

My vote for no isn't anything to do with disliking people who are gay. It's trying to preserve the country from turning into a marxist communist hell hole in the future.

So if you campaigned against same-sex marriage you can be sued by homos? Jesus Christ, Australia, get it together.

They don't even have secret ballots in Sweden

Even fucking Soviet Russia had that

you sound fat enough to break the soap box you're standing on you pedantic autist

>It was already unlawful to intimidate or harass someone on the basis of their sexuality
and the fine was that high? it's a declaration that they'll be not only observing but casting a critical eye on
>sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status

>why isn't x leftist/kike tactic fair
baka beats me :/

So if you are a mob boss or a weasley white collar criminal, you have this law to protect you because an attack on them is a hate crime.

Where have I heard this before?

Show me where it states this?

It all implies the opposite. You would think if what you were saying was true, the left wing media would be portraying it as evil to everyone.

I miss Tony so much :(
COME BACK TO US TONY PLZ

>intersex status
what is this

What the actual fuck

>have a plebiscite to determine whether or not fag marriage will be legal
> make it illegal to say it shouldn't be legal

who even knows anymore. i don't want to google it

Read it again mate. Its because shit like this has become very common

couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/supporters-opponents-of-same-sex-marriage-clash-outside-brisbane-church/news-story/524f4cf502cb67f26b6934462f6906ef?nk=2d33b02f5c93063edb7b44600d3226ef-1505196729

Faggot leftists just happen to be at a church the same time some cunts who wanted to vote no were there. hmmmmm

thats when two people are fuckin and you slip and fall between em. happens a lot down under.

ur wrong tho

Why don't they just ban white people living already?

Phar Lap doing well for himself I see, got a statue and everything.

Yeah I was confused. I was thinking it was like in america where the left are the ones getting violent. WOW YOU'RE RELIGIOUS AND HOLD PRINCIPLES I"M GOING TO THROW BRICKS AT YOUR STORE AND MACE YOUR DAUGHTER

Marxists aren't human. I pray that a happening comes where i can personally hang them.

You have to pick a party off a table while everyone is watching

Also if a party's paper runs out you can't vote for them

>Banning opinions
How can you fall so hard so fast? Our laws are less cucked and we are >56%. What's your excuse?

Hermaphrodites mate. You can't call them that anymore or they'll kill themselves or some shit. The proper term is Disorders of Sexual Development (DSD)

Quote it for me.

Sounds more like it's for protecting no voters desu

swedes are fucking space aliens or something

Well I mean the implication of it generally being fags that are completely incapable of facing opposition

Whoa, you fucking retards are so far gone that your brains only seem to work linearly. This law doesn't just exist for the left you colossal fucking troglodytes. Politicians themselves are in the firing line here, and don't wanted to get totaled just because they aren't in support of same-sex marriage. It also protects the average 'no' voter from the often confronting, abusive and harassing 'yes' voter, since 'no' voters are normal people who only pretend to tolerate gays because otherwise they'd lose their jobs. I'm honestly baffled that I had to spell all this out. You fuckers are genuinely losing your minds.

>not even legal yet

>already being used to censor people

is this secretly one of ourguys falseflagging?

>and the fine was that high?
The maximum sentence is fucking jail time you retard.

Holy fuck are you incapable of using Google or at least shutting the fuck up for once?

legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/CURRENT/A/AntiDiscrimA91.pdf
Section

Section 124A and 130something.

>Show me where it states this?
In the fucking legislation you fucking tard.

Go and fucking read it. I can't show you where it states it because that's all it is. All I'd be doing is showing you the whole fucking thing.

This is how I interpreted it

>This law doesn't just exist for the left you colossal fucking troglodytes
yeah, only them and the entire 3 people in australia that go to church anymore. post anything on facebook or twitter though and bam, you're done

You know this will be the future, right? This law will never be repealed since it "worked so well :)" and the braindead Australian public will just accept it. This is what happens when you let the government take your guns and violence away, they take your voice and words too.

All left wing media. Zero push back in terms of media.

In the US you at least have FOX vs everyone else. Even if you want to pretend FOX aren't right wing, they are 100 times more right wing then any media we have here. All the left wing media parrot the same opinion, people in society are too lazy to search information for themselves so it results in the masses believing the media, since they are unquestioned by an authority figure. This is why the gun ban was easily pushed through with not much resistance. Because ALL the media said it was a good thing.

Go ahead and Sue a faggot then
See how much your case holds up in front of a commie magistrate.

holy shit thats real? people have BOTH sex organs? and they are born that way? how come ive never seen this in porn ever or even a picture of it?

Thank god.

The only reason that these fag-o-trons are pushing this shit is because they want an extra set of right that supersedes those of the non-anal prolapse community

>The maximum sentence is fucking jail time you retard.
alright we'll circle all the way back to my point in the first place. the only way to safely present a no opinion is on the basis of religion, as was what op posted

Quote the part where it's protecting no voters.

Also, if this is true, why is the left wing media (all of Australia's media) not pushing this "homophobic law"?

I've asked several people in this thread like you, yet they fail to answer these questions.

>It will be unlawful to vilify, intimidate or threaten to harm a person either because of views they hold on the survey

At first it sounds like it's defending faggots but this can easily be turned against them

>gay marriage is societal sin
>oy you can't say that it's the law now!
>I am muslim
>....

Why not cite federal legislation. You think we're all banana benders do ya troppo?

And?
How does that imply no voters?

When are the ballots going out anyway?
I want to give it a big fat fuckoff No

Fuck freedom of speech in this country unless you agree with the left.
Naturally this shit won't apply to muslims who can say whatever the fuck they want about whoever the fuck they want and the left says "You're so right".

>It will be unlawful to vilify, intimidate or threaten to harm a person either because of views they hold on the survey ...

>It will be unlawful to vilify, intimidate or threaten to harm a person because of views they hold on the survey

>unlawful
>villify, intimidate, threaten to harm
>because of views they hold on the survey

how come aussies are cucked but have based abbot, while italians are based and only elect cucks?

>"emergency" laws
Have you Aussies lapsed into civil war? Are there oceans of blood in the streets?

Jesus! Please don't become Bongistan!

...

>the only way to safely present a no opinion is on the basis of religion, as was what op posted
You misunderstand the law.

The law does not require you to make good arguments. It just requires you to make polite arguments.

"I oppose gay marriage just because," is a perfectly legal argument to make. You won't convince anybody, but that wasn't your point.

Because I practice law in Queensland. Anyway, all states have similar laws.

Just like how anti racism laws fervent minorities from trashing whites.

does this go both way?

I mean if fags slur normal people can we sue them? btw fags are gay mmkay?

They never fucking enforce those, only when it's against straight white men, dumb cunt.

Remember when that bakery had to shut down because they refused to make athem Trump cake?
Remember when thousands of companies were sued for hiring women and black men for their gender and skin color?

Can we still call them cunts?

its pretty fucking rare mate, and there are different types of conditions depending on the chromosomes and other factors. I learned about it in a genetics class at uni. I don't wanna get banned so i wont post any photos. Check out google lad.

You misread it

It's banning the vilification of people that go either way.

You know, social shunning of people that say no.

>sue
>criminal offence
The magistrate telling you that only the public prosecutor can bring a prosecution re: a criminal offence, and that only the police can charge people with crimes, does not make him a communist.

It makes you a retard whose own ignorance is perceived as an evil conspiracy because you don't understand how the world works.

>democracy
>free speech is banned
pick one, australia

this

Considering the military here only hires non-whites and women, I can't understand how people think the state won't use this kind of law specifically to fuck white conservatives.

Yes

You know how the left loves socially shunning people that don't pander to them? Getting people fired and all that?

This means they can't do it.

>
>"It will be unlawful to vilify, intimidate or threaten to harm a person either because of views they hold on the survey or in relation to their religious conviction, sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status
>racism is still cool though
I mean, it could be worse OP

Are liberals still in power?

That includes literally everyone you mongoloid. People ignoring it, heteros voting yes, homos voting yes, homos voting no and heteros voting no.

And?

If you think that people voting no would have a chance of using that defense you are delusional. The law is clearly made for the vote yes side because they want no push back.

THIS.....
is fucking disgusting

>allowing gay people to have marriage ceremonies will change society as we know it and destroy families
>LOL SO BASED WHY DID YOU KICK OUT THIS ALCOHOLIC?
Some times I wish Sup Forums actually was satire

They won't uphold it for the vote no side, this is obvious.

go ahead, be brave, i never met an aussie scared of being banned
i think everyone in this thread promises not to report you, plus the mods are asleep

Until the next election. They should have just legalized it under the condition that churches cant be compelled by law to host weddings.

Shut up flaggot.

Nobody cares about your shitty uninformed view of the law. Do you not remember the QUT discrimination case less than six months ago where that abbo women was blown the fuck out by the courts? Of course not, either because you don't read anything other than Sup Forums; or you can't remember what you do read because you're an idiot; or you're a fucking Brazilian hiding behind a memeflag.

Kill yourself in real life.

you drugged therese johaug, I am onto you

>"Why demonize someones right to an opinion?"
>wants to demonize people for getting married
kill yourself poofter. cos you are you know, a poof. deep down you know it and you hate yourself. what youre experiencing is called projection. of course its possible youre just an edgy faggot by nature and to that i'll say good luck on your upcoming high school graduation ceremony

Not to mention it's not a fucking defence you retard.

It's the Crown vs the offender, not the aggrieved vs the respondent.

You clearly are not qualified to have an opinion on this.

It literally says "religious conviction".