 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
David 
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
|
|
|
 |
thesoretoothsayer
Joined: 26 Apr 2017
|
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | ^ I edited to respond to yours. Swoop was surely arguing exactly that.
I think you were also defining views you do not agree with as "risible" so that they public broadcaster can dispense with its obligation to be impartial. That sounds like political bias to me.
What qualifies as "substantial" is of course a matter of reasonable judgement, but the existing law (as in this case) certainly passes it. For the national broadcaster, underpinned by the state's forcible extraction of taxes, to campaign flagrantly for a change in the law is astonishing. |
I didn't think it was risible because I disagreed with it. I thought Tony Abbott's article in The Australian was at times manipulative and disingenuous, but it was a generally intelligently argued piece nonetheless probably about the best case that could be made, really (and a marked contrast to his silly TV pitch about free speech and political correctness). This ABC one, on the other hand, was a dreadfully argued (if you can even use that word) thought bubble that had been lifted from open publishing platform medium.com and, I think, a sad indictment on the ABC's requirement to provide equal time to views that really don't warrant it.
This isn't about my intolerance of opposing views. There are many beliefs I hold quite strongly that can be and are vigorously contested, where I readily acknowledge the merit of opposing views. I hope and believe that my participation in such debates on here has demonstrated my ability to consider other opinions. Same-sex marriage, however, is a rare debate in which the opposing side really has little to call upon and opposing lobbyists tacitly admit that with their desperate attempts to change the subject at any opportunity.
Even though I vehemently disagree with all of the following, I have heard plenty of challenging and thought-provoking arguments in favour of offshore processing of refugees, the death penalty, Swedish prostitution laws, torturing terror suspects, internet surveillance, the existence of free will, identitarian leftism, no-platforming, Thatcherite economics and nearly any other subject you can consider. Come at me any time with any of those topics. I am still waiting to hear anything resembling a compelling argument as to why we shouldn't legalise same-sex marriage, however. I seriously suspect that it's because there is none.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: | | stui magpie wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: | | The optional plebiscite is a joke and a waste of money and represents the last gasps of air from the lunatic right wing of the Lib/Nats holding Turnbull to ransom. Same sex marriage is going to occur. It's just the timing. |
It's a large opinion poll that has seen young people enrol in record numbers.
if you want to shove one up the lunatic right, just vote yes and let the rest happen.
Let's not forget a conscience vote was put forward in the lower house in 2012 and defeated 98 to 42.
Yes, the Libs nats voted on Party lines with No, but there was obviously plenty of Labor no voters too, including the then PM.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-19/same-sex-marriage-bill-voted-down/4270016#votestable |
Coupla things:
Almost all of the pollsters say this is not an accurate way to guage public opinion.
They all agree it is far too expensive and too inaccurate.
So the vote is expensive and inaccurate.
This includes the Lib supporter Gary Morgan
John Howard changed the marriage act independently
The times they are a changing |
So people who make a living conducting Polls suggest that the ABS giving every registered voter in the country the opportunity to submit their opinion is inaccurate. no vested interest there.
As far as Howard goes, the Marriage Act amendment bill was introduced to the house of reps and passed with the support of Labor, or so it seems from this.
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd0405/05bd005
hardly Howard acting alone. Keep in mind this was introduced prior to the 2004 election where Howard won a majority in the senate.
yes it's expensive and yes maybe a simple conscience vote would work this time, but Turnbull is trapped by the far right in the party and this is the only way it's going to happen under a Lib/Nat government.
So stop sooking about the process and just vote.
As far as Bolt's article on the Fags poster, his comments are pretty easy to refute if they're wrong, let's see if anyone does. |
Stop being a goose Stui:
1. The pollsters are skilled at methodology and validity.
To dismiss this as "of course they would say that" or words to that effect does you no credit.
2. The marriage act has been changed many times over in the last 50 or more years - none of which has required a optional plebicite or a referendum. Howard with his nutter right wing buddies did it to prevent a definition of the marriage act to include same sex couples. Who gives a fat rats clacker if it was supported by the ALP or not (Gillard many years later didn't initially support same sex marriage either (mostly because they were scared of the backlash that the extreme nutters could muster (not against gays mind you against the ALP)
3. Turnbull is being held captive by the rabid right wing of his party:  with that type of insightful analysis you could be well placed a participant in mastermind - special subject: the bleedin' obvious
4. Yes it is expensive bloody expensive and going back to the first point is of little value in terms of a flawed methodology
5. Don't confuse my posts with sookin'  - my family all 4 will be voting as I tell them, sorry all support same sex & will be voting yes. I think my Mum & certainly my older brother. I think almost all of the people I work with will vote yes as well.
6. As for Andrew Boltaction, I don't think what you posted is somehow connected with what I've been posting. (If you're referring to my comment on David's post then don't be too literal) 
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
swoop42 
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | | swoop42 wrote: | Given that plenty of society have left wing views why shouldn't the ABC slant that way?
Not many socialists can afford there own right wing television stations like Murdoch with Fox news. |
Because the (at least) half of society who do not have left-wing views are literally forced to pay for it. That is so patently unjust that it should not require explanation. |
The people who work for the ABC aren't paid to be mindless zombies they are paid to give an opinion whether it be from personal experience or based on the facts of a situation.
And guess what sometimes they wont reflect your own or the government of the day.
_________________
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
Jezza 
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 05 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| swoop42 wrote: | The people who work for the ABC aren't paid to be mindless zombies they are paid to give an opinion whether it be from personal experience or based on the facts of a situation.
And guess what sometimes they wont reflect your own or the government of the day. |
The ABC is obligated by provisions of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation Act 1983 (Cth) to be independent and impartial.
As a publicly-funded broadcaster, that's the least we expect of them. If you want the ABC to be left-leaning, privatise it.
_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The ABC does a far better job of offering a range of political opinion than any privately owned commercial network some of whom like Fox news is merely a mouth piece for right wing ideology.
They the ABC ain't perfect but they're good enough.
_________________
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The ABC fulfills it's charter admirably. Occasionally Aunty mucks up. However there have been many reviews of ABC independence & bias which have all ended up showing that claims of bias are bullshit. That is not to say there isn't mistakes being made at times etc
It's basically the only channel worth watching on FTA as well as SBS. Despite funding cuts it does a superb job however the ABC can err. Radio National is pretty good but Michelle Guthrie is far too right wing as the new head honcho of the ABC & this had had negative impacts on the ABC
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
thesoretoothsayer
Joined: 26 Apr 2017
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| swoop42 wrote: | The ABC does a far better job of offering a range of political opinion than any privately owned commercial network some of whom like Fox news is merely a mouth piece for right wing ideology.
They the ABC ain't perfect but they're good enough. |
From the Conversation : http://theconversation.com/whose-views-skew-the-news-media-chiefs-ready-to-vote-out-labor-while-reporters-lean-left-13995
41.2% of the 34 ABC journalists who declared a voting intention said they would vote for the Greens, followed by 32.4% for Labor and 14.7% for the Coalition.
Small sample but indicative of how far removed the ABC is from the community. |
|
|
|
|
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The only people who don't see the ABC/SBS as somewhere about as left as the Comintern are those who see The Age as right wing.
It is one of the most biased and partial media sources available. The only redeeming feature is because they give out their leftism for free they put private left wing media out of business (socialists sure don't like paying for things). |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | The only people who don't see the ABC/SBS as somewhere about as left as the Comintern are those who see The Age as right wing.
It is one of the most biased and partial media sources available. The only redeeming feature is because they give out their leftism for free they put private left wing media out of business (socialists sure don't like paying for things). |
I think it is pretty clear above that the Left know that the ABC has a leftist bias, Wokko. The posts above show that we are past denial and on to justification. I like public service broadcasting, and I think the BBC remains the best source of news in Britain, even if its leftist biases show at the margins. i watch the ABC and despair at its shamelessness. It probably should be privatised (which is to say abolished) and replaced by something better and more balanced.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | | Wokko wrote: | The only people who don't see the ABC/SBS as somewhere about as left as the Comintern are those who see The Age as right wing.
It is one of the most biased and partial media sources available. The only redeeming feature is because they give out their leftism for free they put private left wing media out of business (socialists sure don't like paying for things). |
I think it is pretty clear above that the Left know that the ABC has a leftist bias, Wokko. The posts above show that we are past denial and on to justification. I like public service broadcasting, and I think the BBC remains the best source of news in Britain, even if its leftist biases show at the margins. i watch the ABC and despair at its shamelessness. It probably should be privatised (which is to say abolished) and replaced by something better and more balanced. |
The ABC is a public sector entity and as such has always been left leaning. My Dad always bought the Aged and the Sun and watched 7 news and the ABC news because between the 2 he said you got a balanced view. he was staunch labor.
I don't watch it a lot, I have no interest in repeats of old BBC TV programs.
Personally I think a public taxpayer funded broadcaster has a responsibility to present both sides of an argument and allow presenters to have a cross section of opinions.
As I said, I don't watch a lot of it so I really can't provide informed opinion of how successful they are at that. The occasional episode of QANDA I've watched seems to have a mixed opinion panel, a clearly left studio audience and the host leans left without being blatant, so I'd give that a tick.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Morrigu 
Joined: 11 Aug 2001
|
| Post subject: | |
|
 left wing, right wing, alt left, alt right blah blah blah - is there a checklist somewhere where one can check their status so as to ensure one posts the correct opinion on applicable sites??
_________________
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^
It's the DILLIGAF box.
All good forms have one. 
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | Mugwump wrote: | ^ I edited to respond to yours. Swoop was surely arguing exactly that.
I think you were also defining views you do not agree with as "risible" so that they public broadcaster can dispense with its obligation to be impartial. That sounds like political bias to me.
What qualifies as "substantial" is of course a matter of reasonable judgement, but the existing law (as in this case) certainly passes it. For the national broadcaster, underpinned by the state's forcible extraction of taxes, to campaign flagrantly for a change in the law is astonishing. |
I didn't think it was risible because I disagreed with it. I thought Tony Abbott's article in The Australian was at times manipulative and disingenuous, but it was a generally intelligently argued piece nonetheless probably about the best case that could be made, really (and a marked contrast to his silly TV pitch about free speech and political correctness). This ABC one, on the other hand, was a dreadfully argued (if you can even use that word) thought bubble that had been lifted from open publishing platform medium.com and, I think, a sad indictment on the ABC's requirement to provide equal time to views that really don't warrant it.
This isn't about my intolerance of opposing views. There are many beliefs I hold quite strongly that can be and are vigorously contested, where I readily acknowledge the merit of opposing views. I hope and believe that my participation in such debates on here has demonstrated my ability to consider other opinions. Same-sex marriage, however, is a rare debate in which the opposing side really has little to call upon and opposing lobbyists tacitly admit that with their desperate attempts to change the subject at any opportunity.
Even though I vehemently disagree with all of the following, I have heard plenty of challenging and thought-provoking arguments in favour of offshore processing of refugees, the death penalty, Swedish prostitution laws, torturing terror suspects, internet surveillance, the existence of free will, identitarian leftism, no-platforming, Thatcherite economics and nearly any other subject you can consider. Come at me any time with any of those topics. I am still waiting to hear anything resembling a compelling argument as to why we shouldn't legalise same-sex marriage, however. I seriously suspect that it's because there is none. |
It was not brilliantly argued, but it makes the essential point, namely that defining single sex unions as marriage leaves the churches open to a subsequent wave of attack on anti-discrimination grounds. That argument has been made extensively here. You reject it, but there is historical evidence to suggest it is likely, and there is an inherent contradiction in juxtaposing anti-discrimination law and statutory same sex marriage.
There are certainly reasonable arguments for statutory same sex marriage. However, there are quite reasonable arguments to the contrary. For clarity, those arguments are :
1. The above mentioned contradiction between SSM being on the statute book and churches free to discriminate in law, and the likelihood that this contradiction will be used by militant atheists and gay activists to attack Christian religious freedom.
2. The fact that there are ways to achieve legal equality without using the marriage act, and provoking all of the sensitivities involved. So it seems about power, as much as a desire for equal rights.
3. The fact that marriage has had a heterosexual boundary of meaning for centuries, and we should not play with the concept boundaries of important social institutions to please a minority if their essential rights can be secured via another route.
These are not knockout arguments, but they are certainly not risible.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
