Okay, excuse me for that rant (re the PJW YouTube video), but I am a bit fired up right now - in a few weeks, we (in Australia) are to 'vote' in a Postal Plebiscite on whether or not Same Sex Marriages should be legal.
In fact, I am quite happy - it means not only more opportunities for the AEC (Australian Electoral Commission) and ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics), but also Australia Post. It also means that people who are opposed to same sex marriages (for whatever reason, be it religious or otherwise) will get a say in how policy will be implemented.
I mean, it is no skin off my nose personally, or at least I shouldn't be concerned. I should be on the fence on this issue - I am asexual, so if I had it my way, I would put restrictions on *all* marriages but it is not my place to do so (mind you, I would not ban marriages altogether but it would make people think very carefully about what decisions they should make).
And if it doesn't affect me personally, then why am I so passionate about this debate? I have seen some people (even ones I have known for a long time) 'coming out' in favour of SSM, who who have been very obviously upset about it. Of course, it is their right to be upset, but why? After all, don't gay people already have 'civil unions' anyway in their communities? Isn't that their own term for a 'marriage' or their own 'equivalent'?
It seems like they are pushing some kind of agenda onto the general public when they are not ready to accept it - and people who are not really in favour of it are labelled as 'bigoted' and 'narrow-minded'. And don't even get me started on all the other precedents that might be set if this gets implemented (like the wedding cake fiasco overseas).
The rest of us should also be able to speak our minds and/or vote on issues that might concern us and what better way to go about it other than a postal vote or survey (mind you, it is a survey only, and probably a way to gauge how the public feels about these issues); and (if the votes are in favour of this change in policy, then so be it).
But I don't think that should be stopped. We are not a democracy for nothing. Our ancestors did not fight and die in wars for nothing? Just so a small and vocal minority can dictate public policy and tell us what to do and think.
(no cheers)
Night Owl
In fact, I am quite happy - it means not only more opportunities for the AEC (Australian Electoral Commission) and ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics), but also Australia Post. It also means that people who are opposed to same sex marriages (for whatever reason, be it religious or otherwise) will get a say in how policy will be implemented.
I mean, it is no skin off my nose personally, or at least I shouldn't be concerned. I should be on the fence on this issue - I am asexual, so if I had it my way, I would put restrictions on *all* marriages but it is not my place to do so (mind you, I would not ban marriages altogether but it would make people think very carefully about what decisions they should make).
And if it doesn't affect me personally, then why am I so passionate about this debate? I have seen some people (even ones I have known for a long time) 'coming out' in favour of SSM, who who have been very obviously upset about it. Of course, it is their right to be upset, but why? After all, don't gay people already have 'civil unions' anyway in their communities? Isn't that their own term for a 'marriage' or their own 'equivalent'?
It seems like they are pushing some kind of agenda onto the general public when they are not ready to accept it - and people who are not really in favour of it are labelled as 'bigoted' and 'narrow-minded'. And don't even get me started on all the other precedents that might be set if this gets implemented (like the wedding cake fiasco overseas).
The rest of us should also be able to speak our minds and/or vote on issues that might concern us and what better way to go about it other than a postal vote or survey (mind you, it is a survey only, and probably a way to gauge how the public feels about these issues); and (if the votes are in favour of this change in policy, then so be it).
But I don't think that should be stopped. We are not a democracy for nothing. Our ancestors did not fight and die in wars for nothing? Just so a small and vocal minority can dictate public policy and tell us what to do and think.
(no cheers)
Night Owl
Comments
Post a Comment
What is your own take on this situation? How do you rise above the rot?