Should I vote yes or no on marriage equality? Give reasons.

>>8717747
Vote no because the only reason for it is progressives to spite the right. Love doesn't need a contract.

>>8717747
no, they should have fewer rights

The moment gay marriage is permitted you know the T in LGBT is going to be next on the chopping block. Vote to approve same-sex marriage so we can all move on to the real fight.

>>8717747
bump

>>8717747
Ignore it completely and save yourself the time, it's non-binding.

Vote no so the liberals can't use you as their pawns.

>>8719352
Really?
I'm planning to vote yes because fuck the liberals.

>>8719365
But a no vote is what would fuck the liberals.

>>8719365
Wait, wouldn't liberals be the ones who would be for marriage equality?

>>8719399
Isn't the issue whether the marriage act should be expanded to allow same sex marriage? Why would a no vote help progressives?
>>8719401
The liberals are the corrupt far right party of australia if you didn't know.

>>8719401
>marriage equality
Stop it.

>>8719426
Huh, I was not aware of that.

I wasn't aware that Australians could vote, or even had a government for that matter. I thought it was mostly just scorpions and wallabies down there.

Aren't you guys still part of the British Empire?

>>8719432

That's the southern hemisphere for you.
Our light switches are upside down, our roads are back to front, our toilets flush the other way, and our liberals are conservative.

File: 1409776944840.jpg (10KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 225x225px

>>8717747
Vote Yes.
Reasons at the top of my head:
>gets to take care of your S.O. in hospitals even after visiting hours
>gets to help your bedridden S.O. get their meds
>depending on your employer/contract, gets to use your sick days when your S.O. needs care.
>your house is considered family-owned, so if one of you dies, you or your S.O. won't be homeless
>a gay police officer/firefighter/soldier can assure their partner with their benefits if something terrible happens to them

Basically, with marriage, the government acknowledges that you and your S.O. are legally a family, and not just boyfriends/girlfriends.

>>8719399
Our Liberal party was named as such bad in the 1930's. It was considered "liberal" because it wanted to curb the power of government and open up the economy to big business.

So in comparison to the Australia National party (gun toting farmers who wanted to shoot all the roos and abos) it was technically liberal.

Unfortunately the misleading name is still around today despite them being our 3rd most conservative party.

>>8719582
was meant for >>8719401
Sorry

>>8719560

What the fuck are you planning to do to your SO?

>>8719560
NONE of those things come from a yes vote. If I want one of those things it shouldn't take marriage, whether I'm gay or straight. Gay marriage will only entrench that exclusion to unmarried people.

File: 1401713581737.jpg (50KB, 393x700px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 393x700px

>>8719593
My ex was mugged and hospitalized before, and I was only able to be with him until visiting hours. The hospital allowed his aunt, his nephew, and his niece to take care of him. There's also a gay guy put into jail because he refused to leave his boyfriend's hospital bed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/11/gay-man-arrested-missouri-hospital_n_3060488.html

>>8719642
>My ex
See how this destroys your argument?

>>8719642

I was just avin a gigel friend

>>8719602
Marriage will make the government acknowledge your union as a family, which will allow you to visit your spouse (or let your spouse visit you) and you won't be banned by your or your S.O.'s parents.

>>8719664
We were 19 and it was years ago. I'm just saying if you find someone to spend the rest of your life with, you won't be able to take care of him/her.

>>8719684
Or demand the same things without the marriage.

File: 1408190706456.gif (461KB, 220x220px) Image search: [Google]

461KB, 220x220px

>>8719767
No hospital will allow strangers who claim to be related to the patient stay in a hospital without an ID.

>>8719797
Think up a way to prove he's your SO. Bingo, all the pros, none of the cons like being stuck with someone you don't like at 19.

Doesn't matter
It's a plebscibite and most liberal members have stated that they'll still reject it even if the vote is majority yes

>>8719432
The liberal party is right wing in most places.
You Americans have your own political definitions that we don't share in Australia or europe

>>8719919
Ah, so it's just a case of America being weird again. What are your left-leaning parties generally described as being?

>>8719582
I thought it was because they were economically liberal anyways. The labor party is the oldest in Australia and has always been left wing. The liberals have changed names and reformed many times

>>8719933
Australia has labor, the party associated with workers right and unions.
And the Greens, the environmentalist party that would be good if they weren't all about open boarders and letting in every 'refugee' that exists

Liberals are the most popular because they're in bed with Rupert Murdoch (Fox TV station man) and receive all of the advertisement and TV space

>>8719847
You can't prove he's your S.O. without a marriage certificate. And even if he's in a cheap hospital where drug addicts get their meds, the parents will still have more power and they can ban you from visiting because you're just boyfriends/girlfriends. Also, only retards marry without thinking it through.

>>8719935
>economically liberal

That was exactly my point.

>>8717747
No. Or do if you wish for homos to suffer tremendously more in the near future.

File: 1502465429345.png (333KB, 852x845px) Image search: [Google]

333KB, 852x845px

>yes
>I will suck your dick

>>8720049
>You can't prove he's your S.O. without a marriage certificate.
Yet somehow his relatives get allowed in without one.

You want gay marriage and all this is just pretext you've searched out for it.

>Also, only retards marry without thinking it through.
Missing the point much.

File: tumblr_m5l4imPEFf1rw41szo1_500.png (211KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 500x375px

>>8719447
>ignorance is funny

>>8719602
>hosptials should abandon their policy of restricting visitors from overcrowding the space so staff can concentrate bc i wanna visit my gf laquisha who i met last week
literally your arguement
neck yourself

>>8719642
>i wish they let me stand by my ex
?????????????????

>>8717747
I think churches should be allowed to choose but that won't happen under threat of the government and the people.
I think no. I would allow for gays to marry by the state I guess.

>>8719847
>i want a legal way to prove im in a relationship
>i don't want marriage to be a thing
makin me tink a whole lot there buddy

>>8719642
>There's also a gay guy put into jail because he refused to leave his boyfriend's hospital bed.
Sounds like there could be a million reasons for that.
Also I think posting huffingtonpost is against the board rules.

>>8720534
Actually I'm not the one bitching about needing to prove a relationship and in case you haven't noticed relatives manage it without marriage.

>>8719560
Do civil unions not give the same benefits? (I don't actually know whether they do or not)

Yes because I want the fucking lefties to shut up. And I don't want disgusting Labor or worse, the GREENS getting in.

>>8717767
No but kids do so you can get them passports, healthcare, etc.

>>8721748
TIL you can't get a passport or visit a hospital if you have unmarried parents

>>8721765
My point was more for unmarried parents it is much harder for the non birth parent to adopt the child and if only the non birth parent is the Australian citizen (marry someone foreign) it is doubly as difficult. Civil unions are not equal legally in terms of ease of access to courts and inheritances and legal documents or this would not be an issue. Civil unions are a roadblock to the parameters of family life intended by Christians to prevent their hegemony on families from being shattered.

>>8721776
>Civil unions are not equal legally
Then fight that battle.

>>8721781
To have a separate name for the same thing? Why though?

>>8721794
The WHOLE POINT of civil unions is usually to prevent adoption and surrogacy by gay couples, but also to make sure only straight people can use the socially preferable titles of married, husband, and wife.

>>8721527
Pushing politics in their direction won't make them shut up, it will make them move on to a new goal.

The best thing is to push back, keep them stuck on this issues, and let them lose elections because of it.

>>8721794
Why are you so hung up on the name?

>>8721804
Because it confers social benefits to be able to refer to someone as your wife or husband rather than merely as a "partner" or boyfriend or girlfriend. If those terms are important to evangelical Christians, why would they not be important to us?

>>8721848
You can always refer to your partner as whatever you want.

>>8721861
"This is my husband"

"You are married?"

"Well, not technically!"

>>8721869
"This is my husband"

"You are married?"

"Yes, technically!"

"Doesn't count, Bible says so."

Wow, exactly the same "problem" of somebody not recognizing your marriage. This is so unfair, why do other people get to refer to things as what they want! It should be a hate crime.

>>8719949
Environmentalists! In Australia, the continent that's mainly a desert.

>>8721874
It matters much more to most that the government recognizes their marriage so they can obtain the full benefits and child-rearing privileges than if a Christian says they don't like your marriage. I don't care if Christians think I'm going to hell or I can't get married. They don't control the system.

the libs are expecting it to fail.
vote yes to cuck them

t. MtF

>>8721887
When do you think churches will finally be banned from recognizing straight marriages? 2020? 2030?

File: JesusNeverExisted.jpg (122KB, 720x479px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 720x479px

>>8721897
Was Jesus a real person?

>>8721888
Then again, why are you so hung up on a name instead of wanting equal civil partnerships, since that would supposedly give you everything you want?

>>8721916
There were definitely people named Joshua around that time though. How can you say there was nobody with a similar name?

>>8721921
That was never an option to have the exact same benefits. Australians were given civil unions, which are not recognized abroad as marriages are.

Vote no cause polygamy is next if this pass...

>>8721925
Which country will recognize a gay marriage but not a civil union?

>>8721934
Any country that recognizes gay marriages as valid.

>>8721934
Israel would be a good example of a place that recognizes marriages performed abroad.

If I have a civil union and my partner dies while on vacation I will have a hell of a time transporting the body.

>>8721936
I'm pretty sure that's wrong, but I guess that doesn't matter to you.

>>8721939
I'm surprised you know so much about Israeli law on civil partners transporting bodies.

>>8721943
That doesn't just apply to Israel. Having the rights to claim a body are much easier if I am legally married to my partner. I also get rights to plan the funeral, decide if the body will be cremated or displayed or not, etc.

>>8721952
You haven't shown it does even apply to Israel yet, but anyway, which are these other countries which will stop you claiming a body if you have an Australian civil union instead of an Australian gay marriage?

>inb4 all of them

>>8721966
What that Israel doesn't recognize gay marriages performed abroad? You can look that up yourself.

>>8721966
If you are in a civil union you are unlikely to be recognized as next of kin over someone's parents or brothers or sisters whereas if you are married you are officially next of kin.

>>8721978
Which country's law are you talking about and can I get a source on it treating foreign civil unions differently to foreign gay marriages?

>>8721968
Your claim about Israel that I questioned was
>If I have a civil union and my partner dies while on vacation I will have a hell of a time transporting the body.

And you haven't answered the question in >>8721966 either.

>>8721988
I would assume this applied for most of Europe that does not recognize gay marriage, such as Italy or Poland. If you were to die abroad there, and I could not find a specific case but I remember reading a story about someone who's partner died abroad and he couldn't claim the body, and the parents wanted the body cremated and you didn't, they would gain precedence in the absence of a legal marriage. Why even create such a risk when you don't have to?

>>8722004
Having a civil union risks unnecessary complications:

A starting point of understanding is to realise that a „civil partnership‟ is a very new concept and legal entity which is not something that is recognised world wide unlike marriage. This article examines how the UK recognises “overseas partnerships and marriages” of same sex couples under the new Civil Partnership Act.

http://www.russell-cooke.co.uk/media/2010/recognition_of_overseas_civil_partnerships_and_marriages_for_same_sex_couples_february_2010.pdf

This is probably too few people to have resulted in a notorious case that I can easily find but why condemn gay people specifically to having to worry they won't be recognized as next of kin if their partner dies while traveling abroad?

A marriage means automatic next-of-kin status short of blood relation whereas a civil union does not automatically apply that as a universal or transferrable concept.

>>8717767
this.
We are people with wishes and desires, not political tools to be used and discarded for a little hodgepodge ideological fight.

In fact we should go even further and completely excommunicate any and all cishets from the LGBT community.
get yer own movement breeder scum.

>>8719933
>Ah, so it's just a case of America being weird again. What are your left-leaning parties generally described as being?
In Europe, depending on the country: progressive, socialist, or social-democrat, this all basically means the same (and socialist does not mean communist).

And yes liberal without more context usually means economically liberal in Europe (and therefore right-leaning) rather than socially liberal like in the US (and therefore left-leaning).

There are also centrist parties which are both economically and socially liberal, we call then social-liberal or liberal-democrats (not to be confused with the more socialist soclal-democrats). The French president's party is a good example, so are the LibDems in the UK I think.

>>8721795
this

>>8721875
They do have the Great Barrier Reef to protect though, to be fair. Or rather, what's left of it.

>>8722011
>seven years old
The UK where that's wrong, the US, and many more countries have only even introduced gay marriage since then.

File: Np74KFZ[1].png (570KB, 1024x852px) Image search: [Google]

570KB, 1024x852px

>>8721875
The populated areas in Australia aren't in desert you mongoloid American. Nobody gives a shit about the outback, they give a shit about the coastal rainforests clearcut to make way for people.

>>8723589
Well as an example of a well thought out civil union system.

I agree with legalising gay marriage but I'm too lazy to vote.

>>8723705
wut

>>8724263
Well like I don't know what goes on in Slovenian civil partnerships and the UK system was country-wide for a while.

>>8724306
In other words, your link is no evidence at all.

>>8724336
What no the fact that this is a legal grey area is evidence. I searched pretty hard and found nothing.

>>8724225
so you're voting no then

>>8724355
That's true but they have my support.
And in the end, isn't that the most important thing?

File: 1486111983821.jpg (73KB, 361x405px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 361x405px

>people who support LGBT rights, but won't vote yes because of idealistic dreams that aren't being addressed or discussed at the moment
>boycotters who won't pull their heads out of their asses

>>8717747
vote yes because love is love

File: 5.jpg (6KB, 259x195px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 259x195px

>>8725987
can you be a populist somewhere else

>>8726785
But how will others being happy benefit me personally?