Jara

Now the developers are suing the government for trying to make them remove asbestos. Jeez... Those two individuals should be banned from ever working in this country again.

Yoicks, Biff - that's a whopper post. Things must be quiet in Altona. No time to answer it all, but one quick question - based on the (relatively few) friendships I've had with gay or transgender people, I'd say they've led very stressed lives (one transgender woman I know has been beaten in the street a couple of times, and constantly cops abuse). The simple fact that no AFL footballer has come out is similar evidence of this. One of the arguments in favour of ssm is that it will, hopefully, encourage the wider community to accept gays and reduce the amount of crap they have to put up with. Think of a gay teenager in a country town, how he has to hide the instincts he was born with, the stress this must cause (I grew up in a country town - was amazed, when I was in third year uni, when the guy who'd been my best friend all my life told me he was gay - I may be a bit thick, but I had absolutely no idea - I felt so ashamed of all the homophobic banter the rest of us had engaged in in the playground, the footy club, etc). Given all of the above, how can you say that the legal recognition of ssm will not reduce the suicide rates?

I really only know two couples in same-sex relationships - all of them seem to recognise that we need a broad coalition of support to get this thing through (not that any of them were in favour of the plebiscite in the first place- all wanted a simple parliamentary vote). Have you discussed this with your friends organising the floats? Why not ask them which way they'd like you to vote? There are all sorts of people supporting the yes vote - including rabid lefties like Christopher Pyne, Warren Entsch (sp?) Turnbull, Birmingham, etc. It's ridiculous - and disappointingly illogical - to say you won't support an issue because it is also supported by other groups you don't like. Getup and antifa members are presumably in favour of drinking water - are you against that too?

That's one heck of a load of Jo Nova you've posted there. Oh well, at least it's a break from your IPA entomologist.

"Having said all that I don't want to stand in the way of the very small minority who are really hoping to be recognised as married couples and can't be at the moment." So don't. Because in muddying the waters and bringing in irrelevant distractions and red herrings that's exactly what you're doing - making it harder for our gay brothers and sisters to enjoy the same kind of stable, officially respected and recognised relationships that the rest of us have had.

Good on Dieter. Bolt is an arrogant pig, the biggest bully I'm aware of in Australian public life. I presume (haven't read him lately but I\d be surprised if he wasn't) he's getting his knickers in a knot about the Queensland girl losing her party job - but happy for the Melbourne Archbishop to threaten the jobs of the Church's (overwhelmingly taxpayer-funded) 180,000 employees. Must admit - I'm curious - I presume you're advocating a No vote. Can you give me a logical reason for this position? Most people I hear can come up with nothing more cogent than the deluded opinions of a bunch of Bronze Age goat herders.

He's been banging on about how equal marriage advocates are bullies.

Nah, no way. Religious people wouldn't do that. They only condemn people to death in Africa because they refuse to allow condoms, or shift rapists on to the next parish, or insist that people should be left dying in agony for months on end because their BS god doesn't approve.

I've yet to see a logical reason for bringing in all of these irrelevancies (like Safe Schools) into the debate. Safe Schools is already operating. How will that change? It's irrelevant. If we were discussing traditional marriage, would the fear-mongerers let us bring in issues like domestic violence? Or the divorce rates of traditional marriage? Would those idiots who say marriage is all about procreation be happy to talk about infertile people marrying? I doubt there is a logical argument. It's just mean-spiritedness (and insecurity - I was listening to some idiot on the radio saying Marriage Equality threatens his marriage and I thought - jeez, mate, you must have a pretty insecure marriage). For god's sake - these people are our fellow countrymen (and presumably Melbourne supporters) . Why deny them the rights the rest of us enjoy? Why not spread a little love around?

I said I didn't think he was "a genius political operator". I presume he was a competent political operator - sure - that's how he stayed in power for so long. But genius? That implies some sort of higher-level ability that I never saw any evidence of him having. I suppose what kept him in power for so long was his recognition of the fact that you can suck up a lot of swinging voters by appealing to their baser instincts - ie Howard's battlers. Trump's done the same thing.

Confusing motivation with implementation? I know the difference. Not sure I was talking about either. I was criticising Howard's lack of vision. He would take a very narrow, self-centred view of a topic and was incapable of seeing its wider ramifications. The republic debate was one example. His view? Monarchy has served us well in the past, why change it? No imagination, no understanding of the benefits that the surge of confidence that could come from our country finally growing up might bring. His criticism of the "black armband" interpretation of history was another. You can praise prosperity, "progress", enlightenment, etc - as much as you like - but how can you ignore the fact that this prosperity was bought with the blood of the original inhabitants? The most outrageous example of Howard's blindness , of course, was invading Iraq. That showed a Stevie-Wonderish lack of vision. Saudi jihadists hit New York so he attacks ...er..Iraq? The most secular state in the Middle East? What a moron. We are living with the consequences of that idiotic decision every day. Because of my work, I've come to know hundreds of Muslims over the years. They have a wide variety of attitudes and aspirations, but one thing I often notice is their belief that Islam is under attack and the example they most commonly give is the invasion of Iraq. Bush, Howard and Blair - two idiots and a slime ball.

Yes, all of this is correct. What I personally found most annoying about it was the number of commentators who thought it demonstrated that Howard was some kind of genius political operator. Gimme a break. It was a blatant cynical move, demonstrative of nothing but a complete lack of vision. Since when did appealing to the ignorance of the electorate stamp you as some kind of genius?

Oh god, not the bloody entomologist again. I wish you'd start quoting qualified climate scientists and not IPA stooges.

That said, I do think Turnbull was pathetic in bringing on the vote without giving details of the legislation. Left the yes-side wide open for abuse, misinterpretation and fear-mongering. Bit like Howard and the Republican referendum. Not that Turnbull really gives a sh*&t. HIs overwhelming interests are money, power and self-aggrandisement.

The conservatives are bringing up all sorts of tangential issues because there's no logical argument against same-sex marriage itself. Listen to talk-back radio - 3AW etc - or the drongoes in your local pub - mostly stupid ageing men whose main argument is "Never had it before, don't see why we should have it now." Like most conservatives, their driving motivation is a complete lack of empathy (and maybe a fear of their own latent homosexuality). They have hearts of stone.

It'd be about the only promise they haven't broken.

Sure. I had to wear a dress for much of my childhood (was an altar boy - in Biff's hometown) - look at the fine figure of a man I turned out to be,.

I thought it was a brilliant ad - straight to the heart of the matter. Those bloody Stalinists, dragging off all our little boys and making them wear dresses ( only priests are allowed to do that)

uh god - don't remind me - how long is it since we had an undisputed champion like that at our club? Who was the last? RDB? We're cursed. My bloody (but much loved, sorry dad) father, making me barrack for this club.

Magic! (I mean your reference to organics, not the mushrooms)

Oh god - unpunished massacres everywhere. Conniston then - 1928. I visited it once with an old man whose mother had hidden him, as a toddler, in a log - came out to find his family slaughtered. The constable, Murray, was regarded as a hero by the local whitefellers. Not saying burn books - I'm saying write them accurately.

The folks of Myall Creek say hello.

Zeno's paradox. We'll never get in.

I don't know about the tax thing. I see tax money spent every day of the week on things I hate (e.g. Geelong and Bulldogs ovals, freeways, Tony Abbot's extravagant travel expenses ) If we spend a bit to help some tortured soul gain greater peace of mind, I won't be complaining. Not sure what you mean by "weakened" society. If you could indulge me with a brief story. Some CFA members of one of our neighbouring brigades told me of their female crew leader who performed heroically on Black Saturday. The crew believed she saved their lives during a burnover by her courage, experience and skill. She had lived most of her life as a male. How is she "weakening" society?

Biff - I've known a couple of people with gender issues - have copped a terrible time, both from society and from their own minds - they are our fellow citizens and we should give them nothing but friendship, affection and acceptance. I assume that's what The Age article was trying to do. If it helps some kid somewhere struggling with his or self-esteem, good on it.