Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Opinion

Expert strata, facilities & building management services

Gay marriage status quo has Abbott on shaky ground

By Marcus Paul 13 August 2015 64

tony-abbott-stock

And so it was, the Coalition’s marathon same-sex marriage debate in Canberra has ended in farce.

With two thirds of the joint party room supporting ‘traditional’ marriage, our MPs and senators have drawn attention to the fact that our country remains stuck in the 50’s. According to some it’s made us an international laughing stock.

To the disappointment of many, our current government is yet to decide on exactly what policy it will take to next year’s election.

“Our position going into the next election should be that in a subsequent term of Parliament this is a matter that should rightly be put to the Australian people,” Mr Abbott said.

What form will this take, PM? Will this popular vote will be a plebiscite, where the controversial question can be carried by a simple majority? Or perhaps even a referendum-style vote?

The latter of course, is far more risky for supporters of same sex marriage (as I am) as it would need to be confirmed with a much greater majority of Australian’s across all state’s and territories. It’s fairly obvious it would pass here in the ACT.

What else is certain is that ministers, MPs and senators are becoming even more concerned over the Prime Minister’s handling of this debate and the issue surrounding former speaker Bronwyn Bishop. The image of Mr Abbott sharing a kiss with Ms Bishop on Monday, whilst others clearly kept their distance, has rankled many.

There are now even more doubts about the Prime Minister’s judgement and leadership.

One can only wonder whether it leads to another party room revolt similar to the one we saw six months ago.

There are also many predicting Malcom Turnbull will become increasingly vocal in the near future.

Perhaps a plebiscite is the better way to go – but it should be done in line with the next election, and NOT after.

Do you support same sex marriage?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Marcus Paul is the host of Canberra Live 3pm weekdays on 2CC.

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
64 Responses to
Gay marriage status quo has Abbott on shaky ground
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
GrumpyMark 9:01 pm 17 Aug 15

dungfungus said :

Maya123 said :

The survey needs one other place to tick…’Don’t care’. I mean, not even all heterosexuals want to, or care to, marry.

Agree.

dungfungus said :

…. He has an obligation to all Australians to have a say and a referendum is the only way this can be done. ….

I’m having trouble reconciling the fact that on one hand you seem to agree with someone who doesn’t care about SSM, but on the other hand you suggest that everyone should be forced to express an opinion via a referendum.

Perhaps your next suggestion will be that Senator Cory Bernardi should draft the amendment to the question? That would ensure that the referendum would be defeated.

As an earlier poster advised you, the constitution does not need to be amended, as there is no definition of marriage contained therein. Consequently a plebiscite is the logical approach – the question can simply be put in the same simple manner as the OP has done in the survey. Those who have an opinion can express it and those who do not can abstain. Perhaps you are concerned that the Far North Queenslanders will be apathetic and not turn out to return a “No” majority.

You denounce the result in the Irish referendum because of the relatively low number of votes cast. Well that just means that a lot of voters did not wish to express an opinion one way or the other – a perfectly good reason why the result was valid.

dungfungus said :

… When you say “we”, are you one of the 1% of all Australians who registered as being same-sex? …

Before you play the “you support SSM therefore you are gay” card, I’m a happily married heterosexual male. I support SSM because it will have no impact whatsoever on my marriage of almost 36 years to the same lovely lady.

However, I will confess to a dark secret. I actually have friends who identify as gay or lesbian. So my opinion is tainted by a desire for them to be able to openly, in front of their friends and loved ones, declare their love for their respective partners in the same way my wife and I were able to do so all those years ago.

dungfungus 6:29 pm 17 Aug 15

Garfield said :

John Moulis said :

HenryBG said :

No_Nose said :

I’ll be changing my vote because I believe that if the government can’t even get the small and inconsequential issues sorted in the simplest manner, then they really have no hope of dealing with bigger issues.

a) You keep saying this about your voting history and intentions, and I am fairly confident that it is not the truth.

b) in the enormously unlikely event that a long-time Liberal-voter would change their voting intentions on the issue of homosexual marriage, I would say that person was seriously intellectually-challenged.
Claiming that a redefinition of “marriage” is more important than the Libs’ destruction of the renewables industry and their incompetent economic management that has led to an *increase* of the deficit and a massive increase of our foreign debt is utterly moronic.

As a long-time Liberal voter who has posted videos on YouTube appealing for people not to vote for The Greens, I will be voting for the Greens candidate in the Senate at the next election. Zed has completely lost me with his opposition to gay marriage. If Gary Humphries was still the Lib senator I would be voting for him, but I cannot vote for Zed.

As another long-time Liberal voter, I don’t know what I’ll do come the next election. Abbott and the conservatives have pushed the party too far to the right, with the 2014 budget and this staunch opposition to SSM showing their true colours. I don’t know that I can bring myself to vote Labor or Green so maybe I’ll just turn up to get my name signed off and not cast a vote. Maybe the Liberals need to be annihilated so that Abbott goes and Zed goes locally so that the party can come back with a better balance between the conservatives and moderates.

Careful what you wish for there, Garfield.

Garfield 4:23 pm 17 Aug 15

John Moulis said :

HenryBG said :

No_Nose said :

I’ll be changing my vote because I believe that if the government can’t even get the small and inconsequential issues sorted in the simplest manner, then they really have no hope of dealing with bigger issues.

a) You keep saying this about your voting history and intentions, and I am fairly confident that it is not the truth.

b) in the enormously unlikely event that a long-time Liberal-voter would change their voting intentions on the issue of homosexual marriage, I would say that person was seriously intellectually-challenged.
Claiming that a redefinition of “marriage” is more important than the Libs’ destruction of the renewables industry and their incompetent economic management that has led to an *increase* of the deficit and a massive increase of our foreign debt is utterly moronic.

As a long-time Liberal voter who has posted videos on YouTube appealing for people not to vote for The Greens, I will be voting for the Greens candidate in the Senate at the next election. Zed has completely lost me with his opposition to gay marriage. If Gary Humphries was still the Lib senator I would be voting for him, but I cannot vote for Zed.

As another long-time Liberal voter, I don’t know what I’ll do come the next election. Abbott and the conservatives have pushed the party too far to the right, with the 2014 budget and this staunch opposition to SSM showing their true colours. I don’t know that I can bring myself to vote Labor or Green so maybe I’ll just turn up to get my name signed off and not cast a vote. Maybe the Liberals need to be annihilated so that Abbott goes and Zed goes locally so that the party can come back with a better balance between the conservatives and moderates.

Mysteryman 3:13 pm 17 Aug 15

watto23 said :

Well firstly referendums are for constitutional change. Even the suggestion of a referendum is a political tool from the anti SSM side. Also it comes down to the exact wording and the fact you need a majority of states to agree, thus votes in the ACT and NT actually mean much less in a referendum, which in itself is a form of discrimination that needs to be fixed.

People are using the words referendum and plebiscite interchangeably because they don’t know the difference. It’s nothing to do with it being a political tactic.

watto23 said :

Plebiscite is the tool a government can use to gauge public support. My only concern on a plebiscite is not that it wouldn’t pass, but again its being used as a political tools. Typically plebiscites have been used to determine public opinion on issues like the national anthem and daylight savings…. Not on issues involving the rights of minorities.

Actually they’ve only been used 3 times at a Federal level – and twice it was relating to military conscription.

watto23 said :

The reason that support is high for SSM…/quote]

You forgot to mention the public shaming and vilification of anyone who doesn’t agree with it. I’m certain there are a LOT of people who won’t speak publicly about their stance for fear of unjustly being branded a bigot.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site