Comments on: Australian Senate rejects gay marriage bill

By: kate

kate — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 00:40:32 +0000

i cant even begin to explain how mad it makes me as an Australian to know i voted for Kevin Rudd, PM’s should not be allowed to make laws the discriminate in the name of GOD!!! it makes me sick, he makes me sick.

By: jonnielondon

jonnielondon — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 01:55:44 +0000

With 31 out of 76 senators basically in favour of the Green party’s bill, this is a good indication that change is definitely in the wind. It’s only a matter of time now, Australia. Keep on pushing the envelope and change WILL come. We’re not going away!

By: David Lambert

David Lambert — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 11:43:17 +0000

No doubt a future prime minister will give an apology to the gay community similar to the ones given to the Aborigines and migrant children.

And we will look back and remember Mr Rudd as a bigot. Wow, what a legacy!

By: Jako

Jako — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 10:01:45 +0000

Yes, Abi, you are spot on. Mr Rudd showed Australian’s what he really thought when a very good satirical show called The Chaser threw a rope over a church’s steeple which Mr and Mrs Rudd were attending, to expose their hypocrisy over Uluru ( Ayers Rock ) after the traditional owners ( Aboriginals ) asked visitors to stop climbing over their sacred site. Mr Rudd thinks anyone has the right to climb Uluru. Mr Rudd’s disgust at the Chaser’s stunt registered with everyone watching. mardi Gras became a corporate advertising exercise years ago and when most young gay men began to think HIV was curable and no longer a problem.

By: Abi1975

Abi1975 — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 09:31:52 +0000

Rudd is another papist that takes his orders from Rome!

Sidney you don’t need a mardi gras you need a riot.

By: John

John — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 09:22:44 +0000

and i suppose aussie gays will just ‘celebrate’ mardi gras as per usual! Why don’t you actually use this event to show up your spinless government for what it is? Time to raise the stakes i think!

By: paul

paul — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 01:02:41 +0000

And if they chose to vote AGAINST the party line, what would happen? Are they there to represent the party or the people? To abstain they obviously don’t agree with the party and so must agree with the people. They’re just as bad as those who voted against. Same tarbrush for those who stayed away.
I stopped attending weddings years ago, telling those who invited me that I’d attend once I was an equal citizen of Australia. Most get it bit an awful lot don’t.

By: RobN

RobN — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 21:02:00 +0000

Leilah: Almost all political systems work that way. We have the party whips in this country doing the same. What they need to do is an independant cross-party vote, where the whips are not involved and ploiticains have a free choice.

If I had my way I would banish whips completely. What’s the point of having individual MP’s if they can only vote the party line.

By: dave

dave — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 20:43:18 +0000

\\\\\\Thanks Leilah
its clearer now.

Dave

By: David

David — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:36:40 +0000

Sadly, both major Australia political parties appear to be in thrall to the religious lobbies and both major party leaders have on occasion made their own strong religious beliefs known. There will be change, though I suspect not any time soon.

By: Leilah

Leilah — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:33:05 +0000

@Dave. They have to vote based on their party line. Their personal views are overridden in a vote like this & they may be forced to vote opposite from what they believe. The only option available to them is to refuse to vote.

It’s sad but Aussie politics are a clone of the USA.

By: dave

dave — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:11:41 +0000

sorry for being thick , but what was the point of abstaining or staying away.wouldnt their vote have made more of a statement than not voting either way. can anybody clarify. we are not all politicians. i wish these articles werent so vague!

By: Burb

Burb — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:04:23 +0000

Bad Aussies – no biscuit for you!