Same-sex marriage may be law in Australia by early December

[webfact]

Same-sex marriage may be law in Australia by early December

By Alana Schetzer

 

FILE PHOTO - Supporters react as they celebrate at a pub located on Sydney's Oxford street. REUTERS/Steven Saphore

 

MELBOURNE (Reuters) - Australian lawmakers on Thursday vowed to push through laws legalising same-sex marriage by early December, after a national survey found the majority of Australians favoured the move.

 

Both Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull's Liberal-National coalition government and the main opposition Labor Party said they were aiming to pass the law through parliament by Dec. 7.

 

That timeline was even earlier than the Christmas deadline named by Turnbull on Wednesday after the country's statistics agency reported that 61.6 percent of voters surveyed favoured marriage equality, with 38.4 percent against.

 

Legislation was rushed into the national parliament's upper house Senate late on Wednesday, even as colourful celebrations in the major cities continued and congratulations rolled in from international supporters.

 

If the legislation passes as expected, Australia will become the 26th nation to legalise same-sex marriage, a watershed for a country where it was still illegal in some states to engage in homosexual activity until 1997.

 

The legislation faces some opposition from conservative lawmakers in the coalition, who have pledged to introduce amendments to protect religious freedom that would allow discrimination against same-sex couples.

 

Attorney-General George Brandis moved two amendments on Wednesday, seeking to extend protection to civil celebrants to refuse to officiate same-sex weddings.

 

"They’ll move amendments and some of them will be accepted," Turnbull told a radio station on Thursday. "We're cracking (getting) on with it."

 

A rival bill proposed by the conservative faction that would have included widespread protections for religious objectors, including florists, bakers and musicians, to refuse service to same-sex couples was withdrawn after being widely condemned.

 

Full debate on the bill, which was introduced by Senator Dean Smith, a member of the coalition and the country's first openly gay lawmaker, is scheduled to begin on Nov. 27.

 

Almost 80 percent of the country's eligible voters took part in the voluntary public survey - a higher voter turnout than Britain's Brexit vote and Ireland's same-sex marriage referendum.

 

(Reporting by Alana Schetzer; Editing by Jane Wardell and Michael Perry)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-11-16

[tifino]

 

(If) all the Non Voters, were really No Voters, who didn't bother to Vote, in protest...

 

... complained -  then they have themselves to blame!

 

A common reason why Non Voters didn't act, was the belief that this Vote wasn't a real vote, and just a litmus test

 

Now the litmus test, has become implied to be a majority 'vote' of the majority  

 

The goal posts set at the onset of all this, was insistence by all levels, that the result was in no way - 'binding'

 

 

[Grouse]

When I first read the headline it sounded compulsory! I'm not going down there thinks I!

[Jingthing]

It was a landslide.

Get on with it, Australia.

[mfd101]

38 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

It was a landslide.

Get on with it, Australia.

Yes, in any Western democracy, if one party won an election with 62% of the vote, it would be called the landslide of the century! And so the politicians, even Tony Rabbit, no doubt think: so Rabbit & his crew have gone suddenly quite quiet ... how long will it last?

 

The vote was not 'legally' binding but it's binding enough for any politician who values his seat (so to speak). Brexit wasn't 'binding' either ...

[Jingthing]

Yes, it wasn't legally binding.

Everyone knew that.

But get real.

Suppose the results were the opposite.

The issue would be dead for a very long time.

It's only fair that just like such a no vote would have been taken seriously, so should an overwhelming YES vote, which indeed has happened. 

[tifino]

 

I'm still waiting for the landslide,

that blocks all the In-Trays at Immigration, with prospective fiancees

[Luckysilk]

It was a postal survey, nothing legal about it.

 

Now let’s see if the politicians actually do something about the results with this poll- wouldn’t surprise me at all if they did nothing.

[Jingthing]

44 minutes ago, Luckysilk said:

It was a postal survey, nothing legal about it.

 

Now let’s see if the politicians actually do something about the results with this poll- wouldn’t surprise me at all if they did nothing.

Of course it was a legal postal survey.

No, the results don't legally obligate the government to act on the results.

But considering the results showed an overwhelming LANDSLIDE majority for yes, there certainly will be strong political pressure to do so.

I expect that they will indeed do so. 

Again, IF the results had been flipped, there would have been strong political pressure for the government not to go ahead with this and it's highly probable they wouldn't have. 

If there was any ambiguity in the results, like a very close result, then things would be messier now.

But, that didn't happen either.

It was a LANDSLIDE.

Edited November 16, 2017 by Jingthing

[phantomfiddler]

I always thought aussies were a bit strange ! Gotta get ,em in when you can haha :)

[wonder6281]

Another good reason why I moved away. 

[Scott]

I think it is similar to the reaction in the US to gay marriage.   It happened not because a lot of people were in favor of it, it happened because a lot of people really didn't care much one way or the other.  

 

 

[alex8912]

In the States I remember it happening with a trickle. First was Massachusetts many years ago where I lived and even there it was not a landslide. Then very slowly by several other states. Actually extremely slow.  Many states were vehemently opposing it all along the way and people cared very much about this issue. 

[ronrat]

Most people in Australia do not care. They voted yes because they are tired of this and hope it goes away. They also don't like being told what to do by churches who pay no tax but want all the say.

 

Good luck to those who are effected by this and don't fret if some dimwit won't make you a cake. His/her business will go bust if social media gets hold of them.

 

 

 

[pegman]

1 hour ago, ronrat said:

Most people in Australia do not care. They voted yes because they are tired of this and hope it goes away. They also don't like being told what to do by churches who pay no tax but want all the say.

 

Good luck to those who are effected by this and don't fret if some dimwit won't make you a cake. His/her business will go bust if social media gets hold of them.

 

 

 

How about a mail survey on non-tax status of churches?

 

Good on Australia. Whether this issue affects you or someone close to you it is a matter of principle that all people should be treated the same under the law. If you let close minded people have their way on this type of thing they will come after your or your loved ones rights at some point. 

[MickGC]

1 hour ago, ronrat said:

Most people in Australia do not care. They voted yes because they are tired of this and hope it goes away. They also don't like being told what to do by churches who pay no tax but want all the say.

 

Good luck to those who are effected by this and don't fret if some dimwit won't make you a cake. His/her business will go bust if social media gets hold of them.

 

 

 

The majority of electorates that voted NO were those with large migrant populations. As you stated, most Aussies don't give a rats especially in regards to religion.

[tandor]

17 hours ago, Luckysilk said:

It was a postal survey, nothing legal about it.

 

Now let’s see if the politicians actually do something about the results with this poll- wouldn’t surprise me at all if they did nothing.

...the excitement is mounting..which dress or pants to wear..Im all in a tizz.

[nev]

About time now I can marry myself. 

[Jingthing]

19 minutes ago, nev said:

About time now I can marry myself. 

I have some bad news for you ... 

[nausea]

So we can expect the divorce rate to what?  Double, triple, quadruple? Crazy - marriage is the death bed of sex, what should be a licensed orgy ... ?

[Jingthing]

8 minutes ago, nausea said:

So we can expect the divorce rate to what?  Double, triple, quadruple? Crazy - marriage is the death bed of sex, what should be a licensed orgy ... ?

Fear mongering.

 

 

 

[nasanews]

So if a child is raised by gay couple would that child grow up and be normal which is impossible or would be another homosexual?

[jvs]

8 minutes ago, nasanews said:

So if a child is raised by gay couple would that child grow up and be normal which is impossible or would be another homosexual?

If a child is raised by a gay couple and receives love and care and learns to respect others it will grow up to be a perfectly well adjusted person who will judge people on who they are and not what they are.

I hope this answers your question.

I have a question in return,would it make a difference in your opinion if

the couple were two men or two women?Would it make a difference

if the child is male or female?

 

[Jingthing]

So if a child is raised by gay couple would that child grow up and be normal which is impossible or would be another homosexual?

So I guess my parents were gay based on your logic.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Rancid]

9 hours ago, ronrat said:

Most people in Australia do not care. They voted yes because they are tired of this and hope it goes away. They also don't like being told what to do by churches who pay no tax but want all the say.

 

Good luck to those who are effected by this and don't fret if some dimwit won't make you a cake. His/her business will go bust if social media gets hold of them.

 

 

 

I think you pretty much right, although maybe toss in bored with it as well.

 

The irony is that Australia will be facing some massive economic problems soon, mining has dropped from 19% to 6.8% of GDP and further drops in demand coming, we virtually have no manufacturing any more, wage growth is stagnant, the only thing making non productive money was the housing bubble which also is coming off the boil.

 

And yet this was the only matter of importance to many Aussies. They should replace the Emu on the Coat of Arms with an Ostrich, head buried in the sand.

[sevenhills]

How can they "Legalise" it when it was only a Survey. There needs to be an official Vote or Referendum for it to hold any weight. 

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, sevenhills said:

How can they "Legalise" it when it was only a Survey. There needs to be an official Vote or Referendum for it to hold any weight. 

Don't be silly. They didn't even "need" the mail in survey vote. The legislators are already democratically voted in and empowered by the people to make such decisions without any further votes of the people of any kind. 

Edited November 17, 2017 by Jingthing

[sevenhills]

7 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Don't be silly. They didn't even "need" the mail in survey vote. The legislators are already democratically voted in and empowered by the people to make such decisions without any further votes of the people of any kind. 

That's not Democracy then is it, then we don't need to have "Elections" anymore either.

[Jingthing]

Just now, sevenhills said:

That's not Democracy then is it, then we don't need to have "Elections" anymore either.

Of course it's democracy. You elect the government representatives to vote on specific issues on your behalf. Whether or not to make same sex marriage legal is but one of many many issues that they deal with. Same sex marriage was deemed controversial enough that the government in power sought POLITICAL COVER to proceed with this. They now have that. 

[nasanews]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Of course it's democracy. You elect the government representatives to vote on specific issues on your behalf. Whether or not to make same sex marriage legal is but one of many many issues that they deal with. Same sex marriage was deemed controversial enough that the government in power sought POLITICAL COVER to proceed with this. They now have that. 

What if the representatives are corrupt like the senate and congress, I prefer people's vote on major issues.