Jara

I was responding to your disappointingly ill-informed comment about the fires being caused by fallen power lines. Black Saturday was caused by the conditions: a heat wave that broke every record coming at the end of the worst drought we'd ever seen. I'm not saying it was definitely caused by global warming, but it's part of a pattern. The fact that we haven't had another disaster since then proves nothing. It's only been eight years. These disasters seem to come every 25-30 years. If they start to occur more frequently, as the experts I spoke to feared was happening, then we'll be pretty sure we're in trouble, long-term.

Wrecker - are you being deliberately obtuse? You really think the Black Saturday fires were caused by fallen power lines? Answer me this. If you were standing by a smoker and he dropped a match, would you rather the two of you were standing in a field of snow or a pool of petrol?

Wrecker - I've known quite a few people who died from what may well be climate change. Black Saturday. Worst fire in recorded Australian history, coming at the end of the worst drought in recorded history. Fire broke various records (for example, spotting at a distance of 35 ks - a record, according to the fire scientist Kevin Tolhurst) Difficult to prove, of course - could just be a big coincidence. Been a lot of coincidences lately - lot of bad fires, extreme weather events. Scientists being what they are (i.e. professionals), they always leave open the possibility of being proven wrong - a space into which the dim-witted denialists leap. Anyway, not to worry - you've always got Malcolm Roberts on your side.

I suspect we need all the supporters we can get. Chances are anybody who cares enough about the club to ring up a radio station is a pretty devoted member. Bit of criticism, the odd hissy fit - all part of the rich tapestry.

Report post If I stick me head out and observe the weather I might notice we are about to break another raft of records. Found this a bit hard to follow. What do you mean?

I hope I'm as impressed with Goodwin as you seem to be by the time he leaves, but so far he's achieved nothing other than fail to get us into the finals. Watts has paid the price for that - deservedly, perhaps, but there are plenty of other mediocrities in our team.

I couldn't care less about Goodwin being a premiership player. I suppose I'm willing to reserve my judgement about his being a decent coach, but so far I've seen nothing to suggest that he won't be the latest in conga-line of failures. I regard his inability to lead our team into the finals this year as a failure. Watts was overall a disappointment, but he played well in 2016 and continued that form into 2017 until he was injured. We had plenty of worse performers (even most of our so-called leaders could do with more work on their skills). I can't believe we gave him away for pick 31 and that we still have to pay a large chunk of his salary.

Dunno if it's worth posting here, given that there's only about half a dozen of us who bother reading or posting, but - that said - to the climate change deniers among us - your spiritual leader, your Abbott, has gone seriously psycho. Weirdest part of his latest babble - global warming is good for us. Good for us! What a jerk. He should be the one in the High Court defending his citizenship - I presume the moron thinks he's a friggin Pom. Confirms my belief that his supposed volunteering as a fire fighter is nothing more than a photo op. Anyway, Tony - a word of advice. We're in Australia, you knobby-skulled weirdo. Hot is not good. Hot kills people, including children I knew. Hot destroys crops and economies. Hot is bad bad bad. Hot is a terrorist. And so are you. You global warming deniers, ditch the Abbot. He has been driven out of his mind by relevance deprivation. He is too weird, even for you. If you're looking for a leader, I'd suggest Malcolm Roberts - he'll be looking for a new gig pretty soon.

I'm not saying they shouldn't say anything. It's all part of the ritual, I suppose. They can say whatever they want. The losers always do. All I'm saying is that I'm bloody sick of hearing it. I've given up listening. Personally, I'd rather they said nothing at all. I'd rather they were so worn out from busting their guts trying to win a premiership that they were too exhausted to talk.

Some excellent points, but I'm so sick of hearing players, coaches etc banging on about the disappointment of missing finals. They can't be that disappointed, or they'd do something about it.

Excellent post, Nut. Been more red herrings than a Scottish fishery. Re Labor's earlier lack of support, disappointing, sure, but yet another example of how weird out political system can be. Conservatives are sometimes better placed to bring in changes because the ones who dislike them for it dislike the other side even more (the opposite is also true - see Howard and gun laws). I presume Wong, Gillard etc supported marriage equality - they were just afraid of electoral wipeout if they introduced it.

Thanks to all of you - do love this site.

Great that you're voting yes, Daisy. Hope you're right about the majority voting the same way. I'm not totally convinced they will - been a lot of red herrings and misdirection.

The argument is more than imperfect - it's fatally flawed. Babies are being born to same sex couples every day, with or without marriage. That question has already been resolved. This debate is about whether we choose to give those families the emotional support that comes from being able to say you're "married". I suppose gut feeling is on your side, because it's your guts, but I don't know that biology is. Social mores - and technologies - are constantly evolving. Are you also opposed to IVF? Caesarians? PS - Nutbean and I crossed in mid-air. He was saying similar things, but better.

You gave a diagonal nod to the flaw in your argument, but you should have given it more - maybe a genuflection? Gay couples can already have children. Whether their parents are married or not is irrelevant - in fact, if it influences the discussion at all, it should be an argument in favour of marriage equality - ie more community acceptance for the thousands of children being born to same sex couples = more positive outcomes. When I asked for a cogent argument, I was hoping for something a little more objective than "I believe children have the right to a mother and a father..." Is there any evidence to support your view, or is it just prejudice? (I'm not saying there is no evidence that children would do better with a mother and father, I'm just saying I haven't seen it. I may be prejudiced myself - the only same-sex couple I know raising a child seem to be doing a better job of it than most of the straights I know - their little two-year old is so cheery, he makes us all laugh).

Yes, it's like these idiots who you hear on 3AW or such places who say something along the lines of "I'm in favour of same-sex marriage but I'm so annoyed by the Yes campaign that I'm voting no." Subterfuge. Something tells me they never were in fact in favour of marriage equality, and were just looking for an excuse. I've still yet to see a single cogent argument against marriage equality. At worst, they're like the religious fellow who posted a page or two back saying the Bible was against it. At least folks like Faultydet are honest enough to say: "I just don't like it."

I didn't understand that. One minute the right are going hysterical because the Yes-mob put out a randomised text-message - it's an intrusion, a denial of their rights, an abuse of their kids etc - then they go and do the same thing.

I'd like him to keep opening it until the end of the Tory government. I've noticed my teenage daughters and their friends think he's getting seriously weird these days - looks like a skull with eyeballs, ego as big as a firetruck.

Er - I never said you weren't entitled to a vote or an opinion, and I certainly didn't say you were a homophobe. I was just kind of hoping you could come up with a more logical argument than the one you offered. Never mind.

Hey Biff - here's a dilemma for you. http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/gay-marriage-australia-queensland-imam-urged-muslims-to-vote-no/news-story/8359f3aca7fd6b7ec0f3a2677a99c35b (Imam in Victoria today said the same thing, but i couldn't be bothered looking for it) strange bedfellows you find yourself with (not literally I'm sure) - i.e. you're always bagging Muslims but they're with you all the way on this one

I don't get it. If you were kind enough to sponsor their basketball team, why not continue the kindness and let them get married if they want to? What's it to you whether they marry or not?

Biff, I don't get it. You're worried about what you describe as the constant push to destroy religious rites but you say you're not religious yourself. Don't you understand that, by not being religious, you are doing your own bit to destroy religion? Personally, I was ambivalent about organized religion - until the pedophilia business. Not so much the pervert priests themselves, but the official attempts to cover it up. Then I began to think of religion as something we'd be best evolving away from - which we are.

Do you have any empirical evidence for your opening claim? When I was a kid cops would beat gays up (sometimes kill them, as in Adelaide); now they march in the Mardi Gras. That seems to me to be a gradual acceptance - a "normalisation" - of homosexuality. Good thing, too. I look at my gay friends and I think - these are good, kind human beings, exactly like the rest of us in the vast majority of things. Why shouldn't they have the same rights as the rest of us? What have you got to fear? Politics enters the personal sphere every day of the week, every minute of the day. Were you jumping up and down when Howard (with a simple parliamentary vote) passed a law restricting marriage to members of the opposite sex? Attack on traditional religion and families? All a matter of opinion, I suppose, but I personally reckon traditional religion deserves a good kick in the goolies. Traditional famiies? How long have they been around? Wasn't that long ago, even in the west, when marriage was more of a business deal than an expression of love. Read Jane Austen - women were raffled off like livestock. I wish I was an inner-city yuppy - my house would be worth a lot more.

Kinda funny how people rely on the Bible for their views on homosexuality, but not for their views on, say, antibiotics, Western democracy or particle physics.

Thanks Don't Make Me Angry - I've always wondered this - does Jesus actually come out anywhere in the New Testament and condemn gays, or is the whole wacko homophobic thing based upon the delusions of the Bronze Age goat herders?