AUS PLEBISCITE FEB 2017

HERE WE FUCKING GO CUNTS
news.com.au/national/australians-expected-to-vote-on-same-sex-marriage-plebiscite-in-early-2017/news-story/92377eb43e2babf77717c9d52f6b7b39

Other urls found in this thread:

baka.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/poll-shows-growing-support-for-samesex-marriage-20140714-3bxaj.html
australia.isidewith.com/poll/965633/9331610
theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/newspoll/more-australians-back-change-to-allow-samesex-marriage/news-story/1f645f84cb458c9648d9e80f0d564592?nk=6f5291a260c1c748368e9b18bf0cea98-1473686902
abc.net.au/news/2016-06-22/election-2016-vote-compass-same-sex-marriage/7520478
starobserver.com.au/news/national-news/new-poll-shows-surge-in-support-of-marriage-equality/147526
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Australia
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

VOTE NO BOYZ

The enabling act for the plebiscite has to pass parliament first and Labor and the Greens said they'll block it. It's not going to happen.

Isn't buggery a time-honored Australian tradition tho?

leviticus 18:22. if you let these fucking degenerates get married you are enabling the slippery slope to get even worse.

Both sides are being treated fairly?

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>Fags: Everyone agrees we should get married!

>Everyone: Okay, let's vote on it!

>Fags: NO!

>Everyone: Huh? Why?

>Fags: BECAUSE EVERYONE (WHO AGREES WITH IT OF COURSE) WILL VOTE AGAINST IT!

Help me out here - What's with this logic?

>Fags should be allowed to get married!

>Okay, let's do the vote.

>No! We'll block any attempt!

So...Then fags just won't get married, right?

Seems stupid to me.

I was going to vote yes, because I thought it would make Muslims mad. But since the Greens and Labor seem intent on pissing away my tax dollars by literally stalling and arguing for no reason that I can think of, I'm now going to vote no.

The slippery slope is already in effect.

See the many threads about "Safe Schools".

The weird thing here is that the left is doing everything in their power to NOT have a vote on the issue...Yet I don't see them being able to get the law passed any other way.

It's not a slippery slope, it's a food in the door.

Slippery slope is a fallacy where two unrelated events are linked by the fallacy-maker (fallator?)

Foot in the door is an actual thing, where political idealogues first force small concessions (IE gay marriage) in order to open the door to bigger concessions (IE child marriage, animal marriage). It's not a fallacy, because the events are directly related by the intentions of the group, who see each step as "progress".

Because it's all politics m8. Labor are delaying the vote because they want to be the ones who oversee the legislation of gay marriage in Australia. It's their pet issue and they're not going to let a conservative government steal the credit from them.

END THE GAY TREND

This.

We gave the fags an inch, and now they're trying to take a mile. Vote no!

wtf i love abbot now

another user said they were stalling it untill they can be the ones to bring it in in. he was from the aus QandA bingo thread

its pretty dank ay

Because the openly leftist party doesn't want the closet (lel) leftist party taking this achievement from them.
Whomever signs this in as PM gets permanent historic good boy points to the useful idiots.

voting no for slippery slope factor and because i'm a good christian

Not the same guy, but yeah that's what I said here

Why are we spending money on this?

Why is the government interfering with religious institutions? Are they really going to force priests to marry gays?

Just give them a civil partnership.

where can i get that cool hat

>Are they really going to force priests to marry gays?
No.

ah same thing

Carrying over from the qanda thread.

>Yes. I want different zoning laws. I am saying we ban, permanently, all apartment towers, and demolish the ones that already exist.
And how come only you have this town planning secret? Is every town councillor, every town planning professor, every architect too stupid to know it?

Gay marriage was legalised in America over a year ago and nothing has happened. Why so fearful, Aus-bros?

Because this may be our last chance to show that we still have the balls to stand up to leftists and tell them they can't always get what they want

It's probably gonna pass but I want the plebiscite just to see all the leftcuck tears when they hear other opinions being broadcast against it.

this

Listening to the radio today I learned that "buggery" is literally the name of an illegal act in Australia.

I have no idea what it means

Anyone know if its compulsory to vote. This will be a huge factor in the result

That's a good point. If its not compulsory to vote fag marriage will be approved for sure.

>Help me out here - What's with this logic?
The logic is we didn't need to goto a plebiscite on literally any other issue ever so why this one? The only other plebiscites were over consciption for WW1 and what the national anthem should be.

>I was going to vote yes, because I thought it would make Muslims mad. But since the Greens and Labor seem intent on pissing away my tax dollars by literally stalling and arguing for no reason that I can think of, I'm now going to vote no.
The plebiscite is costing 160 million bucks, including 10 million free dollars given to churches to """"campaign"""" by giving them fresh boys to fondle.
Meanwhile, today int eh senate Liberals got up and talked about their fucking FAVOURITE TV SHOWS and what chocolates their daughter liked instead of making gay marriage legal.

>Because the openly leftist party doesn't want the closet (lel) leftist party taking this achievement from them.
>Whomever signs this in as PM gets permanent historic good boy points to the useful idiots.
If Turnbull put it to a vote in parliament right now Labor and the Greens would support it. it's about Turncuck being too gutless to go against his own party.

probs not
it would stop the melbourenites from getting their frappashitichinos in the morning and annoy lelbourne in general

Realistically the cucks will pass this if there's a plebiscite.

Not enough of us will vote no.

I want there to be a plebiscite just so you guys get BTFO when it goes 80% yes.

post yfw it doesn't pass and Melbourne erupts

Don't make the same mistake we did lads

all muslims and Christians would vote against?
also all of WA

Also lots of queenslanders will vote no I assume

Vote no. Children are fucked over for life by gay pedophiles, over 1/3 of all convictedpedos are homosexuals here it's disgusting

aye

They can't force priests to marry gays. Though any church that wants to can choose to marry gays and then the government would recognise the union.

The whole thing should be a plebiscite on "gay civil union", which is what it actually is, the slimy cretins.

Your only hope is that there are enough Chinks and Muzzies who oppose it. Most white Australians will vote yes.

Maybe multiculturalism isn't so bad after all.

just have to beat the vic and NSW hordes

i already know that's how it's going to turn out

Only rural Queensland. SEQ will vote yes.

>Implying Gold Coast and Brisbane won't flip your state

Who /KnightOfTheOrderOfAustralia/ here?

>all muslims
So that's 2%
>all practising Christians
gee wizz you're up to 10% now
>all of WA
You mean the state where the ALP left faction runs the party and also has the second highest green vote in the country? LOL mate have you ever been to Freo?

Brisbane probably, but the Gold Coast is basically a bigger Cronulla m8, have faith in them.

Adelaide, and most of SA, will vote yes.

>Leaf accusing anyone of sexual deviancy
You really screwed the pooch here.

But marriage is a legal term and most australians currently get married by celebrants, not priests.

And gays cannot do it (yet)

>So why this one

Because fags won't shut the fuck up about it?

It's fine with me if we remain with them not being allowed to get married, but they are loud and butthurt about it, so why not hold a vote and see if enough of the country wants to make this change?

It's not like we don't piss away time and money on other irrelevant shit, and if fags are right, maybe this isn't irrelevant and does need a vote.

>160 million

Like I said, we can save it and just keep things the way they are.

No reason to change it. It's the fags that are doing the whining.

Fags make up what, like, 1% of the population?

I don't see why the rest of us are being forced to pander to them.

>It's fine with me if we remain with them not being allowed to get married, but they are loud and butthurt about it, so why not hold a vote and see if enough of the country wants to make this change?
Why not hold a plebiscite about how much funding private schools get?
Why not hold a plebiscite about bringing back teh death penatly?
Why not hold a plebiscite about the chinese free trade agreement?
Why not hold a plebiscite about going to war with Iraq?

OH WAIT BECAUSE WE ELECT POLITICIANS DO DO THAT!

It's literally Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane VS Australia

There's around 10 million people in those 3 cities alone, beating this will not be easy.

I doubt it, when push comes to shove most people here are socially conservative. also, with an ageing population, there's a lot of people not "trendy" enough to be in the media who will flat out vote no

b-but muh democracy

>making people equal under the law
>pandering

What? Pull your head in mate.

It's disingenuous. Most aussies are still culturally Christian enough to conflate it with a Christian (or Jewish or Muslim) marriage, and thus think they'll be forcing the religious institutions to marry gays.

you have a point, ill give you that.
not ALP tho
whole stat is liberal exept brand, a little tiny bit including massive population hubs such as

Rockingham
mandurah

and wait for it

kwinanna

You can add Canberra to the left too sadly

Fags are literally already equal under the law. Marriage and Civil Union are between a man and a woman, regardless of whether they enjoy sucking dick or munching rug.

Lefty fags in Britain were quite happy to let their enemy the tory party vote on fag marriage. They knew damn well that the British public would've voted against it.

Add Adelaide to it too

fuck i hope the lebs have been breeding

Wh-what?
Fact: Most Australians do not get married in churches, or by priests.
Fact: Most aussies do not even step foot into a church once a year. """Culturally Christian"""" LOL FUCK OFF.
Fact: Priests would not be forced to marry gays.

Wut

Fuck you, buddy. City of Churches will never fall.

Just pass a bill, who gives a shit? Then we can get on with the real problems, like wiping the mudslimes into the desert where they belong

And Tasmania

>It's not like we don't piss away time and money on other irrelevant shit, and if fags are right, maybe this isn't irrelevant and does need a vote.
Fucking this. The government is willing to spend even more money on them but they will never be satisfied.

Lol, just because we have a lot of churches, it doesn't mean that they get used. Most people are quietly "progressive" here. I think we're actually less religious than Melbourne.

Except gays can get married in Australia. You don't have to fill out your sexuality on the forms.
>Faggot BTFO

Nice way to miss my point. Do you have a dog in this fight? The culture of Australia still carries enough weight for it's people to think of marriage in a religious way instead of the definition in law. For sure, that culture will be dead by the next generation.

It doesn't matter that they don't step into churches, their parents and grandparents did. And yes, the government won't be forcing the religious to marry gays, but people will think they probably will be.

>t. melbournite

this has nothing to do with equality. we already have that; there is nothing preventing gays from getting married currently:

here's the legal definition:
>the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life.

it doesn't say anything in there about them being straight. they can be gay or lesbian or whatever the hell they want to be.

Well, they say the majority of the country agrees with them. So we can have the vote and put the issue to bed.

>Why not hold a plebiscite about how much funding private schools get?
>death penalty
>chine free trade
>going to war

Because no one cares enough and no one complains enough and/or the issue is too important to the politicians to risk it on a vote (see Brexit).

Good luck using it to support any official form of name change then.

yeah most here aren't religious but we're still very socially conservative

>less religious than Melbourne

Surely not.

pic related, my local church...that I never go to

Anything south of Rocky is going to vote yes, even the vast majority of country towns

No, I'm right about the ALP.
Just watch the ALP romp it home in the March election mate. But anyway if you honestly think WA will vote gainst it, you're a clonw
baka.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/poll-shows-growing-support-for-samesex-marriage-20140714-3bxaj.html
>The poll found that a majority of voters across a range of demographics and in almost every age group backed marriage reform.

australia.isidewith.com/poll/965633/9331610
theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/newspoll/more-australians-back-change-to-allow-samesex-marriage/news-story/1f645f84cb458c9648d9e80f0d564592?nk=6f5291a260c1c748368e9b18bf0cea98-1473686902
abc.net.au/news/2016-06-22/election-2016-vote-compass-same-sex-marriage/7520478
starobserver.com.au/news/national-news/new-poll-shows-surge-in-support-of-marriage-equality/147526

>we're still very socially conservative

t. Rural Queensland

Australians in metropolitan regions (where most people live) are not socially conservative in the slightest, nor is Tasmania.

You can get name changing certificates if you really want them, Kale, it's not my fault your parents are from Melbourne.

Don't really care either way but gonna vote no for the bantz

I wouldn't say strongly conservative, perhaps SA js just apathetic and have a 'live and let live' attitude, eg "I disagree but they can do what they want, I don't really care" type attitude.

I couldn't find the statistic, but SA is less religious than Vic. Taking into account centralisation, it's not a long shot.
See: Denominations
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Australia

This is the only correct answer

this is the single largest problem in australian politics

the solution is simple: make every city with a population of 2 million or over a separate territory, take up the rest of the country and give it equal voting power with the cities.

have a look at pic related. our country is held up by mining and agriculture. your "best in the world" universities and "cultural" city centers won't change shit about that.

keeping the actual driving population of the country in the dark in regards to politics and basically all policy decisions is a bad idea and it's going to send our economy even further into the toilet.

and no, for city cunts reading this, your personal experience with a "trashy uneducated stupid bogan" doesn't change shit. if those types weren't mining or farming your cushy ass would starve. cities only exist because the bush keeps them afloat.

forgot pic

>Anything south of Rocky is going to vote yes
Try anything south of Gympie.

What a waste of fucking money

voting no, but i'm prepared for the triumph of the jew. only a horde of ethnic minorities could turn this vote no, like it did in California

I missed your point because you didn't have a point. All the marriage equality bills before the parliament do not force religions to perform marriage ceremonies for gays. If your """""""point"""""" is that legalising gay marraige means that churches have to accept that gays are married in society then that's not what the original poster was asking which was specifically if priests would be forced to marry gyas, which they aren't.

Kill yourself.

Anyone know how much the plebiscite is going to cost?

Based wine industry

Only about a 1 point difference in 2006 but who knows what it is now.

Well in any case I'm now going to go to church this Sunday out of spite. I have five choices:

Lutheran
Baptist
Anglican
Catholic
Uniting

160M or so, isn't it?

I grantee not one town, city or shit hole will have a majority of the voting population vote no

The actual plebiscite will cost roughly $160 million. Then you have to factor in the campaign funding, which hasn't been decided yet.

thats alot of bananas

1.5m for each side dunno how much the gov want s to count it.