Support NeoGAF

[Jintor]

I dunno. I think some people genuinely feel persecuted for being assholes. A friend (or ex-friend now) of mine has shown herself to be really conservative recently and I tried to have a frank discussion with her about it. Basically told her "look, I'm LGBT and the stuff you're posting is pretty upsetting. I don't think I can be friends with you if you think I'm disgusting". In response she started vague-booking shit like "You cut me and pretended you were bleeding", "The truth is there are people who don't care about how you feel and care about being right instead. While we shouldn't be victims we shouldn't be around those who are toxic in the way they treat us", and "I'm tired of people judging me for being a christian". No fucking clue. Being called out for bullying people isn't the same as bullying people.

ugh. That's fucked up. Sorry. I have a friend who was a close friend now at arms length because of their well-intentioned anti gay marriage stance myself. (Although being tired of being judged because you're a christian is fucking hilarious as a way to justify an anti-gay marriage stance. Lol).

What I mean though is that it's no longer kosher to just up and up say "gay people shouldn't have rights", but rather they have to hide it behind "oh it's my OPINION and we all RESPECT EACH OTHER'S OPINIONS and if you don't YOU'RE OPPRESSING ME not I YOU", which to me, indicates that you can't be a complete bastard anymore. Not that I mean that every single person is actively doing the doublethink necessary to compute this, but even unconsciously they recognise the inherent terribleness of their own opinions.

 

[Yagharek]

But that would require insight.

 

[Arksy]

I don't understand the absurd conflation between the religious institution of marriage and the legal institution of marriage. It's not like Australia forbids Hindus from getting married...

 

[Yagharek]

I don't understand the absurd conflation between the religious institution of marriage and the legal institution of marriage. It's not like Australia forbids Hindus from getting married...

When you have institutions of government directly venerating institutions of religion, even acknowledging it in opening prayers at parliament, our head of state is the head of the church of england, and the Consitution itself acknowledges God in the very first sentence, I for one cannot possibly imagine how that might have been conflated.

 

[Shaneus]

What I mean though is that it's no longer kosher to just up and up say "gay people shouldn't have rights", but rather they have to hide it behind "oh it's my OPINION and we all RESPECT EACH OTHER'S OPINIONS and if you don't YOU'RE OPPRESSING ME not I YOU", which to me, indicates that you can't be a complete bastard anymore. Not that I mean that every single person is actively doing the doublethink necessary to compute this, but even unconsciously they recognise the inherent terribleness of their own opinions.

Oh, but you're not oppressing them, but their whole religion! Despite the fact that there are millions of others worldwide who are also Christian but aren't hateful bigots.

 

[viciouskillersquirrel]

Speaking from experience, a lot of devout Christians find themselves in a bind. Culture and an innate sense of justice inclines most to be charitable, inclusive and welcoming. On the other hand, they are told over and over that in order to be 'properly' Christian, they must hold certain attitudes in an unshakeable and uncompromising fashion.

Christian heroes are literally martyrs - people who refused to compromise on their beliefs in even the smallest way to the point of being prepared to die for them. Stubborn obstinacy in the face of social pressure, ridicule and common wisdom is seen as the highest Christian virtue.

Of course it also runs counter to the Christian sympathy for the poor and downtrodden, so it creates cognitive dissonance. A lot of Christians resolve this by retreating toward what they think they know - God wants this. Therefore it must be right and good to do everything possible to extirpate homosexuality in all its forms, how shitty it might make you feel notwithstanding.

It can take a lot to break away from what your church teaches, especially if you're a sincere believer.

 

[Yagharek]

Which really speaks to the problem of dogma that has been filtered through centuries of extreme repression. Most out-group hostility which is a part of the DNA of Abrahamic religion has no place in pluralistic, cosmopolitan societies.

 

[bobnowhere]

You know shit is going to get real when Penny Wong takes her glasses off.


Edit: Turnbull has fallen to 44/41 satisfaction/dis in the latest Newspoll while Snorkleton is bumping along at 30/55. Confirms 2pp, Turnbull's shine is wearing off.

 

[Candescence]

Yeah, the trend is definitely happening. The government is on the precipice of repeating the Abbot government's unpopularity, I imagine Turnbull and his camp are gonna be trying to move quickly to try and fix this, and Abbot and his supporters will be around corners just waiting to trip them up whenever they get the chance.

 

[Elaugaufein]

Yeah, the trend is definitely happening. The government is on the precipice of repeating the Abbot government's unpopularity, I imagine Turnbull and his camp are gonna be trying to move quickly to try and fix this, and Abbot and his supporters will be around corners just waiting to trip them up whenever they get the chance.

Do Abbott's supporters not realize that reinstating him will knock somewhere between 3-5% of however bad their vote has to be to get Turnbull knifed in the first place ? They need someone who's at least plausible more popular than Turnbull to pull this off and for that I've got ..... (Morrison really hasn't done great in treasury and no one else was looking good before that).

 

[Yagharek]

Tony Ahab is off chasing the white whale.

 

[danm999]

Do Abbott's supporters not realize that reinstating him will knock somewhere between 3-5% of however bad their vote has to be to get Turnbull knifed in the first place ? They need someone who's at least plausible more popular than Turnbull to pull this off and for that I've got ..... (Morrison really hasn't done great in treasury and no one else was looking good before that).

The paranoid part of me thinks the right faction are simply trying to run out the clock on the election by blocking any policy, have the voting public wipe out the moderates in safe seats that voted for Turnbull while weathering the storm in their conservative safe seats, and deliver the party back to Tony.

 

[bobnowhere]

NSW Liberals call for national debates on climate change science

The NSW Liberals have formally called on the Turnbull government to conduct public debates about climate change - including whether the science is settled - in a stark reminder of the deep divisions within the party over the issue.

A motion passed at the party's state council calls on the government to "arrange and hold public debates/discussions" between scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and "independent climate scientists".

The motion says the events should cover "the global warming/climate change debate"; "the claims by the IPCC"; and the statement "is all the science settled".

...

Turnbull was jeered and ignored by large sections of delegates and then they went full crazy once he left the room.

 

[Yagharek]

NSW Liberals call for national debates on climate change science



Turnbull was jeered and ignored by large sections of delegates and then they went full crazy once he left the room.

Of course they want a public debate. Hell, since we apparently have such a well educated populace why don't we just devolve all scientific research out to public debate.

Can't wait to see Andrew Bolt tackle the black hole information paradox, Miranda Devine come up with a complex re-write of the Standard Model, and Alan Jones to cure brain cancer.

 

[Danoss]

Hell, since we apparently have such a well educated populace why don't we just devolve all scientific research out to public debate.

CSIRO: Fuck it, science is just a matter of opinion anyway.

 

[bobnowhere]

Sometimes I think as scientists/engineers we are a little at fault when it comes to educating the public about the language we use. We throw around words like proof and theory but never fully explain the significance using those words implies. Also, don't get me started on statistical confidence and error margins! General science education might also be to blame! Yeah Ima gonna blame science education.

Nice explanation of theory:

Members of the general public (along with people with an ideological axe to grind) hear the word "theory" and equate it with "idea" or "supposition." We know better. Scientific theories are entire systems of testable ideas which are potentially refutable either by the evidence at hand or an experiment that somebody could perform. The best theories (in which I include special relativity, quantum mechanics, and evolution) have withstood a hundred years or more of challenges, either from people who want to prove themselves smarter than Einstein, or from people who don't like metaphysical challenges to their world view. Finally, theories are malleable, but not infinitely so. Theories can be found to be incomplete or wrong in some particular detail without the entire edifice being torn down. Evolution has, itself, adapted a lot over the years, but not so much that it wouldn't still be recognize it. The problem with the phrase "just a theory," is that it implies a real scientific theory is a small thing, and it isn't.

 

[Elaugaufein]

Sometimes I think as scientists/engineers we are a little at fault when it comes to educating the public about the language we use. We throw around words like proof and theory but never fully explain the significance using those words implies. Also, don't get me started on statistical confidence and error margins! General science education might also be to blame! Yeah Ima gonna blame science education.

Nice explanation of theory:

The use of Law does not help either. The Third Law of Motion seems more solid than the Theory of General Relativity despite the fact that a Law is really a description (possibly in very specific circumstances) and a theory is an explanation.

 

[Arksy]

A theory is better than a fact because a theory unites facts.

 

[Shaneus]

NSW Liberals call for national debates on climate change science



Turnbull was jeered and ignored by large sections of delegates and then they went full crazy once he left the room.

Next up, national debate on homosexuality: Does it exist?

 

[Yagharek]

A theory is better than a fact because a theory unites facts.

It also predicts new ones that can be tested and falsify the theory or not.

Which is why string theory shouldn't be called a theory.

 

[bobnowhere]

It also predicts new ones that can be tested and falsify the theory or not.

Which is why string theory shouldn't be called a theory.

It's really still a hypothesis at this point.

 

[Yagharek]

It's a mathematically beautiful one at that. But it's also close to fundamentally untestable since the strings would be smaller than the planck length.

 

[Rubixcuba]

Greens leader, Richard Di Natale has been quoted in The Australian as "never saying never to an alliance with the Liberal party". Yikes. Wonder what the Green rank and file thinks about that.

 

[Yagharek]

Depends on the context. Sometimes you see a link between unlikely allies e.g. Greens and Nationals with the lock the gate campaign.

If it's a general alliance then they can GAGF.

 

[Rubixcuba]

Albo had press conference yesterday stating that within Inner city Melb/Syd, the Libs/Greens were entering a preference deal for election. It's been denied of course by both parties, but politically you can see why it would happen.
Knock out Tanya/Albo for easy Green seats, Libs wipe out Labor leadership.

 

[Yagharek]

I don't like that

 

[Elaugaufein]

Depends on the context. Sometimes you see a link between unlikely allies e.g. Greens and Nationals with the lock the gate campaign.

If it's a general alliance then they can GAGF.

Concur with this. I have no problems working with people who only share some of my goals on issues (as long as they aren't like morally reprehensible on other issues). Eg Libertarians and I both agree on fuck the surveillance state and stronger free speech than is normal for the current left even if I find their market philosophy to be dangerously naive.

And yes unless there's major reform in the Liberal party fuck a permanent alliance. I acknowledge the use of a conservative force in politics I just have no interest in being it.

Albo had press conference yesterday stating that within Inner city Melb/Syd, the Libs/Greens were entering a preference deal for election. It's been denied of course by both parties, but politically you can see why it would happen.
Knock out Tanya/Albo for easy Green seats, Libs wipe out Labor leadership.

Ugh. This is a thing that gives me very mixed feelings, on one hand sure get the most progressive candidate a seat will support, on the other hand killing Left influence in the ALP likely has negative utility.

 

[Rubixcuba]

Progressives v progressives is never fun

 

[Yagharek]

It's a dangerous tactical move if the Greens are willing to sell out preferences that would harm major city ALP candidates. ALP and Greens share some similar values which can be mediated if they are willing to negotiate (e.g. Gillard and the Greens 2010-12).

But if the Greens do preferential deals with Libs to the extent that a viable Labor opposition is put at risk then it will actually work against any of the Greens' ideologies in a scenario where the right wing of the LNP gain ascendency. They won't get any of their policies implemented because the LNP right will tell them to fuck off because they have no need of Green support in the lower house. Maaaaybe in the Senate.

It's a Faustian pact.

 

[Quasar]

https://delimiter.com.au/2016/03/09/nz-brings-fttp-costs-fttn-levels/

The Kiwis continue to embarrass us as a nation.

 

[Elaugaufein]

Well the Greens have issued a denial (but they would of course).
https://m.facebook.com/Australian.Greens/posts/10153429175303663

Speaking as a rank and file it seems a little obnoxious in tone.

 

[danm999]

Situational alliances are fine. I would be very unhappy if the Greens committed to something more broadly with the LNP.

However, I honestly don't think they'll be doing that.

 

[Arksy]

Progressives v progressives is never fun

Well it's not like there's a civil war going on between people on the right side of the political spectrum oh no!

 

[Rubixcuba]

Well it's not like there's a civil war going on between people on the right side of the political spectrum oh no!

Haha, sorry Arksy!

How are you perceiving the Abbott leaks?

 

[hidys]

As a member of the ALP I really don't think the Greens are that stupid as to completely destroy themselves in Sydney.

I could be wrong though.

 

[Rubixcuba]

Tony Windsor holding press conference now that he'll stand as an Independent in New England against Barnaby Joyce.

 

[Yagharek]

That would be amazing if he wins. Such a respectable man regardless of whether you agree with him or not. Him and Oakeshott were voices of sanity last parliament.

 

[Dryk]

That would be amazing if he wins. Such a respectable man regardless of whether you agree with him or not. Him and Oakeshott were voices of sanity last parliament.

Yeah they were really good to have around

 

[Shaneus]

That would be amazing if he wins. Such a respectable man regardless of whether you agree with him or not. Him and Oakeshott were voices of sanity last parliament.

He's going to smash Joyce.

 

[bobnowhere]

Apparently Jeremy Buckingham, a Green, from the NSW upper is also running in the seat. The Greens are also going to throw a lot of cash at the seat.

Even though the last election didn't go the way I would of liked seeing Sophie Mirabella lose almost made it all worthwhile. Turnbull is still the overwhelming favourite for the next but seeing Barnaby lose would be amazing.

Edit: Damn my incompetent mobile typing.

 

[Bernbaum]

Speaking from experience, a lot of devout Christians find themselves in a bind. Culture and an innate sense of justice inclines most to be charitable, inclusive and welcoming. On the other hand, they are told over and over that in order to be 'properly' Christian, they must hold certain attitudes in an unshakeable and uncompromising fashion.

Christian heroes are literally martyrs - people who refused to compromise on their beliefs in even the smallest way to the point of being prepared to die for them. Stubborn obstinacy in the face of social pressure, ridicule and common wisdom is seen as the highest Christian virtue.

Of course it also runs counter to the Christian sympathy for the poor and downtrodden, so it creates cognitive dissonance. A lot of Christians resolve this by retreating toward what they think they know - God wants this. Therefore it must be right and good to do everything possible to extirpate homosexuality in all its forms, how shitty it might make you feel notwithstanding.

It can take a lot to break away from what your church teaches, especially if you're a sincere believer.

Also a lot of the time the free wine they have on Sundays is just grape juice.

 

[viciouskillersquirrel]

Also a lot of the time the free wine they have on Sundays is just grape juice.

That too. Wine's expensive and a lot of congregations have an uncomfortable relationship with alcohol.

 

[Arksy]

Haha, sorry Arksy!

How are you perceiving the Abbott leaks?

To be frankly honest, I don't think there has been this much irrelevant nonsense clogging up my newsfeed for months. I honestly couldn't care less about whether some people may have thought that the PM, probably the most watched human being in the country, was having an affair with his chief of staff.

As for what it means for the party proper? The war between the dry faction and the wet faction is pretty damn intense atm. The drys know that the wet has won, but their kicking and screaming has the potential to drag the entire fucking party down. The next election will probably see the party move towards a more moderate standpoint. Hopefully the replacements to a few of the retirees will be a bit more...moist.

I honestly can't believe the media has run with this. I'm going to go hibernate in a bear cave. Wake me up when the country actually wants to have a discussion about policy. -_-

 

[Quasar]

Hopefully the replacements to a few of the retirees will be a bit more...moist.

Given what we see when the young libs make it into the mainstream I wonder if thats likely.

 

[bomma_man]

To be frankly honest, I don't think there has been this much irrelevant nonsense clogging up my newsfeed for months. I honestly couldn't care less about whether some people may have thought that the PM, probably the most watched human being in the country, was having an affair with his chief of staff.

As for what it means for the party proper? The war between the dry faction and the wet faction is pretty damn intense atm. The drys know that the wet has won, but their kicking and screaming has the potential to drag the entire fucking party down. The next election will probably see the party move towards a more moderate standpoint. Hopefully the replacements to a few of the retirees will be a bit more...moist.

I honestly can't believe the media has run with this. I'm going to go hibernate in a bear cave. Wake me up when the country actually wants to have a discussion about policy. -_-

The next election as in this election?

 

[Arksy]

Given what we see when the young libs make it into the mainstream I wonder if thats likely.

Depending, we've got a fair few MPs on the libs resigning. A few of them wets, like Gambaro and Brough (the corrupt piece of shit needs to go).

The dry faction here in SA controls the young libs but even most of them don't give two hoots about same sex marriage and a few other issues that most of the libs/nats have been crying about.

 

[Yagharek]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-11/cassidy-abbott,-credlin-and-the-abuse-of-power/7237386

Cassidy weighs in on Savva's book and unlike pretty much every other columnist is able to clearly distinguish from the start that the affair question is irrelevant. Credlin and Abbott were just terrible at their jobs.

 

[Arksy]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-11/cassidy-abbott,-credlin-and-the-abuse-of-power/7237386

Cassidy weighs in on Savva's book and unlike pretty much every other columnist is able to clearly distinguish from the start that the affair question is irrelevant. Credlin and Abbott were just terrible at their jobs.

Amazing article.

 

[Yagharek]

The way the question was put by I think Fierevanti-Wells (?) was not so much a matter of whether they were or not having an affair, but more a developing perception that they could be. In the context of that office it makes it appear like it was more secretive and dysfunctional than it needed to be.

The fact the question even needed to be alluded to indicates that there were members of government being excluded from discussions they absolutely needed to be a part of.

 

[Fredescu]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-11/cassidy-abbott,-credlin-and-the-abuse-of-power/7237386

Cassidy weighs in on Savva's book and unlike pretty much every other columnist is able to clearly distinguish from the start that the affair question is irrelevant. Credlin and Abbott were just terrible at their jobs.

Thanks. Good read.