Congrats Australia votes yes gay marriage! Awesome!

by Witness 007 20 Replies latest jw experiences

• 

  steve2

  Meanwhile, nearby, New Zealand's parliament voted in the Marriage Equality Act about five years ago.

  Now our Aussie LBGTs won't have to cross the ditch to get married. Well done Australia.
  
• 

  fulltimestudent

  Just a sidelight - but I need to background it, for all you 'non-Aussies.'

  First we have,Tony Abbott. A former (very) conservative Prime Minister ( a bit like one D.Trump), who was dumped by his own party when surveys started showing voters were starting to think he was a dickhead. Tony does have a gay sister, but was probably the highest profile campaigner for a 'NO vote', even though his own daughter publically announced she would vote YES!!

  Now Tony, who in his student days gained a reputation for slamming opponents in student politics, against walls and threatening them with worse, was also once a novice priest and is still very much a supporter of the church.

  Tony, in his younger days also gained a reputation for liking to be photographed in his swimming briefs (that Aussies often refer to as "budgie smugglers," as in this pik:

  

  What did that particular peculiarity really mean? Sorry I just don't get it.

  Now the second man. Here we have a man who was once Australia's highest profile catholic, and having come under some unwelcome suspicion as having had a specific liking for younger boys, found himself promoted to be the catholic church's top money man at the vatican. This is Cardinal George Pell in all his glorious finery.

  

  and ....

  

  I don't know if Georgie boy did anything to any kid, but certainly it seems that he likely knew of priests who did, and did nothing to prevent it. I guess the current court hearing will decide the validity of any police information.

  

  Georgie boy and Tony were good friends. Tony took a lot of notice of what George thought and said, and recently dismissed the allegations of possible child abuse, telling us that George was a really fine man. Some people saw the relationship differently as the satirical image explains:

  

  So to come (at last) to the point, after the successful YES vote announcement on wednesday, an artist painted this picture on a wall, at Newtown's ( a gay locality) Botany View Hotel.

  
  

  Within hours some (apparently) Christian Terrorists arrived and white-washed the Cardinal Pell caricature in the painting, but leaving the Tony A image untouched.

  Apparently, some Christians are sore losers, but I guess most of us learnt that quite some time ago.
• 

  shepherdless

  I am not a fan of either Tony Abbott or Cardinal Pell, but I just feel I have to correct a few things in FTS’s post.

  First we have,Tony Abbott. A former (very) conservative Prime Minister ( a bit like one D.Trump),

  D Trump and T Abbott are not alike. Abbot is a career politician and an ideologically conservative one. Trump is not a real conservative. He is a populist who says things that appeal to a conservative base.

  
  

  Now Tony, who in his student days gained a reputation for slamming opponents in student politics, against walls and threatening them with worse, was also once a novice priest and is still very much a supporter of the church.

  This “reputation” comes from one allegation by one person about one incident that allegedly happened on a University campus, first reported (I think in David Marr’s biography of Tony Abbott) about 20 years after the event. Abbott denied it, and nobody else says they saw it took place. Yes, Abbott trained to be a Jesuit priest, and quit. I don’t know to what extent he could be said to be “supporter of the church” but 2 things make me doubt that:

  1. Even David Marr, who is about as anti-Abbott as you can get, and documented Abbott’s long career in politics, said Abbott was a completely secular politician.

  2. When the Royal Commission into Child Abuse was announced, Tony Abbott, as leader of the opposition, immediately supported it, and it became a bi-partisan project. That is significant, given he pretty much opposed everything else the government of the day tried to do.

  
  

  and having come under some unwelcome suspicion as having had a specific liking for younger boys

  I have not previously read any suggestion to that effect. The criticism of Pell is that, in his role, he must have known there was a problem and he didn’t act, or he acted to cover it up.
• 

  fulltimestudent

  Thnx shepherdess for wanting to make sure that basic facts are correct. I'll respond to your criticism of my post by taking the most serious first.

  shepherdess: "
  I have not previously read any suggestion to that effect. The criticism of Pell is that, in his role, he must have known there was a problem and he didn’t act, or he acted to cover it up.

  and having come under some unwelcome suspicion as having had a specific liking for younger boys

  
  My response: Your statement is correct, in that the original complaint about Pell is that (like many others in various catholic hierarchies) he ignored information about priestly child abusers. But the charges against this man (claimed to be number 3 in the world hierarchy) is specifically one of historic child abuse.

  According to a Sydney Morning Herald report on October 6, 2017:
  

  Up to 50 witnesses could be called and a "voluminous" amount of evidence discussed when Cardinal George Pell, Australia's highest-ranking Catholic official, faces a committal hearing next year on charges of historical sex abuse. ...
  Reference: http://www.smh.com.au/national/cardinal-george-pell-due-back-in-court-on-historical-sex-offence-charges-20171005-gyvds0.html
  
  

  ---------------------------

  Second, is there any evidence for my statement:

  Now Tony, who in his student days gained a reputation for slamming opponents in student politics, against walls and threatening them with worse, was also once a novice priest and is still very much a supporter of the church.
  

  You are correct that there were no other witnesses to the female students allegation against Abbott. Except that a male student, who is now a Sydney Barrister has made this statement:

  David Patch

  Sept 13, 2012

  "I did not see the incident, but I was nearby. The count had just finished. Barbara found me. She is a small woman, and Tony Abbott was (and is) a strong man. She was very shaken, scared and angry. She told me that Tony Abbott had come up to her, put his face in her face, and punched the wall on either side of her head. So, I am a witness. Barbara's immediate complaint to me about what Abbott had just done had the absolute ring of truth about it. I believed Barbara at the time, and still do."

  - Sydney barrister and former Labor candidate David Patch backs Ms Ramjan's story.

  Quoted from: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-14/tony-abbott-barbara-ramjan-david-marr-university-days/4261254

  Which lists a number of statements for and against Ramjan's claim.

  Attempting to observe Abbott's character from afar, I see a strongly opinionated man who is intense in the way he approaches the causes in his life. Would you call his attitude pugilistic? I would, and could believe the above incident. You may not - but there are times when there is only one witness to an event.

  -----------------------------

  And third, my statements that (a) Tony A is a bit like D.Trump, and (b) that Abbott is a supporter of his church.

  You state categorically that, "D Trump and T Abbott are not alike." And further that, "Abbot is a career politician and an ideologically conservative one. Trump is not a real conservative. He is a populist who says things that appeal to a conservative base."

  Here we approach a problem with definitions. What is a 'conservative?' I see similarities, you don't. OK! I think that Trump's approach to politics is 'conservative,' you think he is a populist that only pretends to be 'conservative.' We can agree to disagree.

  But how deeply are Abbott's religious beliefs involved in his political agenda? I'll let the Jesuit publication, Eureka Street,(which I subscribe to) answer:

  "Tony Abbott is the most prominent current Australian political leader with ties to the Labor Split of the 1950s, through his personal association with B. A. Santamaria, the leader of the Catholic Social Studies Movement.
  ... Other current politicians have connections through their parents and through its residue in party and union politics. But no one else has ties as deep as Abbott, who stresses the closeness of his association with Santamaria, his personal inspiration and mentor from school days onwards.
  Abbott joined the Sydney University Democratic Club, supported by Santamaria's National Civic Council, before he moved on to the Liberals. Abbott often reflects on the consequences of this period, including the rise of Catholic Liberals. He has been known to observe enigmatically that the DLP is alive and well within his party.
  Abbott has personified church ties with politics through his relationship with the man he has called his confessor, Cardinal George Pell. In the past the relationship of Catholics with their church authorities has contributed to Protestant distrust."
  From an article entitled: " Abbott, Santamaria and Catholic Liberals." by a John Warhurst.
  Link: https://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=20247

  May I add that i originally wrote my post in a rather light-hearted mood, but I always like to have a good level of 'truthiness' in things I say. With some regret, I feel I have left that 'light-heartedness' in this response.
• 

  zeb

  I observed by the footage on tv and I know that it is biased toward the most spectacular or vocal but, the biggest supporters of these 'rainbow' rallys appear to be women 20 30 ish . Today this is age group that has left marriage and are happy to have a partner not a husband and that of course is their choice. So where do they get so excited about others seeking the right and rites of marrying.

  Frankly I think a lot of the supporters of the equality thing are just jumping on a current band wagon as a cause they feel the need to support. I see parallels to the Vietnam demonstrations' of years ago when so many attended with no clue as to what the hell they were protesting about.

  Thoughts anyone.?
  
• 

  steve2

  Zen, what is the big deal that nearly two-thirds of Australians who participated in the poll support marriage equality? It reflects the growing awareness of human rights.
• 

  shepherdless

  Hi fulltimestudent, sorry to be slow to respond. Brief responses as follows:

  1. I hadn't kept up with the news on Pell. Perhaps I had missed it because the allegation (at least as reported) is very vague at the moment.

  2. In relation to Abbott being pugilistic:

  I see a strongly opinionated man who is intense in the way he approaches the causes in his life. Would you call his attitude pugilistic? I would...

  I agree.
  

  ...and could believe the above incident. You may not - but there are times when there is only one witness to an event.

  I don't know whether it occurred. The point is that it was denied and, without re-hashing details, it is dubious. Political opponents of Abbott at the time portrayed it as undisputed fact, as does your original post. That prompted my reply.

  3. Is Abbott like Trump?

  I don't think either of us are too worried about this one. For what its worth, I would describe Abbott as far more like Pence than Trump. (And I am not a fan of any of the three of them.)

  4. "But how deeply are Abbott's religious beliefs involved in his political agenda?"
  

  I have to point out that further down in the article that you quote:
  

  Kelly needs a lot more evidence and more examples before his proposition holds that Abbott is deeply indebted to Santamaria in his policy stances. But he raises two fascinating questions. First, is Abbott drawing on some instincts deeply lodged in Catholic social teaching? The evidence is slight.

  Anyway, I think we both like to see accuracy and support for positions. Sorry to be a "kill-joy".

  BTW: I enjoyed reading your articles on the history of Korea.
  
  
  
• 

  snugglebunny

  Frankly I think a lot of the supporters of the equality thing are just jumping on a current band wagon as a cause they feel the need to support. I see parallels to the Vietnam demonstrations' of years ago when so many attended with no clue as to what the hell they were protesting about.

  Agreed. IMHO, many folk are confusing equality with freedom.
  
  
• 

  LoveUniHateExams

  Today this is age group that has left marriage and are happy to have a partner not a husband and that of course is their choice. So where do they get so excited about others seeking the right and rites of marrying - I think it's about freedom of choice.

  LGBT Aussies can now marry if they so wish, like hetero Aussies.
• 

  Outahere

  Gay marriage only becomes possible in a culture once traditional marriage is thoroughly devalued.