-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AusPoliGAF |OT| Boats? What Boats?
- Thread starter Bernbaum
- Start date
- Status
Why? We should learn about lots of things we dislike, so we understand them. I've debated (non reddit style) atheism with some work colleagues who are YECs for example. I know they don't agree with me, and I don't try to force any opinion on them but I believe that if you are going to reject an idea, theory, philosophy or religion you should at least understand what you are rejecting. In the spirit of openness we did a book exchange. Sagan's Pale Blue Dot for a collection of essays on why some scientists still believe in creationism (personal accounts). I think that if you can't discuss controversial subjects civilly then you shouldn't be discussing anything at all.
i.e. take evolution. Some YECs expect that if the theory were true, rocks should randomly morph into chickens. That's not what they theory says at all, yet they reject it. If someone actually understood the theory, what it predicted, what it explained and still rejected it on the basis of their faith then at least they have considered the theory as it is, not as it isn't.
You cannot teach someone that "x is correct" but you can teach them x, correctly.
Let me rephrase: If there existed a government program that tried to instill any sort of political doctrine onto kids beyond a mere explanation of facts, history, perspectives etc I'd have an issue with it.
Safe schools is a silly name but all it is is a toolkit which gives teachers and schools the means to be inclusive of the mere fact that LGBT people actually exist. It's nothing insidious or a gateway drug (whatever the fuck that means). The only non-retarded response has been from John Howard who says some of these issues are best left for families to teach.
Safe schools is a silly name but all it is is a toolkit which gives teachers and schools the means to be inclusive of the mere fact that LGBT people actually exist. It's nothing insidious or a gateway drug (whatever the fuck that means). The only non-retarded response has been from John Howard who says some of these issues are best left for families to teach.
No but we should at least gives students the ability to come to their own conclusions.
Isn't that a form of relativism?
It's certainly been interesting watching the party slowly head in that direction
Aarglefarg
Member
Nationals MP George Christensen has used parliamentary privilege to accuse Safe Schools of being linked to a "paedophilia advocate".
if these reports are accurate I really underestimated how fucking loony the backbench libs are in relation to safe schools. like, holy shit.
I thought they were just cynically playing up the anti-homosexual agenda thing for whatever dumb reason but i guess they believe their own heaping steaming mound of bullshit
I thought they were just cynically playing up the anti-homosexual agenda thing for whatever dumb reason but i guess they believe their own heaping steaming mound of bullshit
Elaugaufein
Member
Is there some kind of Social Law about how whenever a politician invokes terrorism / paedophiles there's like a 90% chance whatever they are advocating is a terrible idea ?
Even then, that just allows the cycle of misinformation and potentially bigotry to trickle down through generations.
Shit, parents can barely be trusted with teaching their kids basic reading by the time they hit school, I doubt they'd ever broach anything remotely sexuality/gender-related.
You know how in America when a vocal pastor or politician complains about homosexuals or infidelity they almost always have either a harem of lovers in every city they work, or get caught sucking their staffer's cock in an airport bathroom?
By the same terms I reckon George's internet history bears investigation.
Elaugaufein
Member
Think it's too expected at this stage.
bobnowhere
Member
We're all thinking about it when it comes to Bernardi!
Just saw a bit of QT, Bill was on it today. Eviscerated the Coalition front bench and all Turnbull could come up with was "It's an Exciting Time..." Probably the first time I've seen MT look even slightly rattled.
Not unexpected, he was bleating about it when the whole broohaha came up the first time
bobnowhere
Member
Apparently the Letter/petition is now missing!
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/safe-schools-petition-goes-missing-as-conservative-push-fractures-turnbull-frontbench-20160317-gnl66o.html
Interesting rumors going around that there may be a massive infrastructure spend announced in the Budget. Borrowing huge sums at 2.7% against 2.5% inflation as 30-year bonds, be mad if you don't. As long as it's genuine productivity supporting projects like public transport, The NBN (lol nope), better city design instead of rail lines to pointless coal mines I'm happy to support this.
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/safe-schools-petition-goes-missing-as-conservative-push-fractures-turnbull-frontbench-20160317-gnl66o.html
Interesting rumors going around that there may be a massive infrastructure spend announced in the Budget. Borrowing huge sums at 2.7% against 2.5% inflation as 30-year bonds, be mad if you don't. As long as it's genuine productivity supporting projects like public transport, The NBN (lol nope), better city design instead of rail lines to pointless coal mines I'm happy to support this.
Elaugaufein
Member
As long as Infrastructure isn't just code for Roads ala a certain Infrastructure Prime Minister. I'm okay with that. There certainly are roads that need attention and places where new roads would be beneficial but Infrastructure isn't jut Roads.
120 editorial jobs have been axed from Fairfax today (Sydney Morning Herald/The Age). Is 1/4 of total editorial staff. Stop work meeting currently taking place. Brad Walter of SMH has twitted he thinks it's unlikely there will be a paper tomorrow.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-17/fairfax-announces-plan-to-cut-120-editorial-jobs/7254372?section=business
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-17/fairfax-announces-plan-to-cut-120-editorial-jobs/7254372?section=business
Elaugaufein
Member
I can't believe how heated the Senate Voting Reform bill is getting (in the chamber and online). Also, there's some pretty impressive deliberate misinformation going around.
Care to expand on the misinformation? I know bits via what I've read on Twitter, but no idea on what's true/false :/
Elaugaufein
Member
I'm not sure its deliberate misinformation by everyone posting it but a lot of people seem to think the Reform is 1 above the line (which was the original recommendation from the Joint committee) but the Greens opposed that (wanting at least a certain number (6 eventually) to be recommended). I did see someone recommend a penalty if parties recommend merely voting 1 above the line (which is kept by vote saving but not following the ballot) which is perhaps a good idea but not covered by the legislation (though I'm not sure if the AEC counts ballots preserved by vote saving as being formal for the purpose of parties not giving misleading information. If it doesn't you could have some real fun there by suggesting people "number" boxes with tally marks or roman numerals or dots, or the Fibonacci sequence or anything else that has a clear intended ordinal value*).
There's also the Greens voted against Same Sex marriage thing going around. Which is sorta true if you squint: They voted against debating the bill (not against Same Sex marriage), and suggested moving it to Thursday (which Labor had no real choice but to go along with after making a stink). It's also completely pointless since it's not going to pass the Lower House short of a significant number of the Coalition bucking party position *hard* and .the numbers are barely there even if the Coalition did have a free vote policy.
* I like the idea of triangular numbers represented as dots in the shape of a triangle.
bobnowhere
Member
???????? said:
George Christensen making as much sense as usual.
Elaugaufein
Member
Its the typical curent conservative position: You may or may not be able to choose if you're born [non-heterosexual] but you choose if you engage in homosexual sex.
Which is technically true but rather ignores the psychological cost.
He's just phrasing it super badly.
Which is technically true but rather ignores the psychological cost.
He's just phrasing it super badly.
What the fuck? Is he saying that people can have a choice of whether they want to be gay or not? So people choose to not have a choice?
What the fucking fuck.
bobnowhere
Member
It's that muddled that It's hard to tell whether he believes LGBTQI people exist but should never speak out, act out or even be acknowledged or he genuinely believes it's all complete bullshit and they are acting out because of "fashion" or the outside influence of pedophiles and Queer Theorists/Cultural Marxists.
Bill Shorten was right, no really, when he said about the Safer Schools Program (paraphrasing): "It's not the program you dislike, it's the kids."
Malcolm Turnbull probably disappears into his office at times and wants to tear his hair out!
Bill Shorten was right, no really, when he said about the Safer Schools Program (paraphrasing): "It's not the program you dislike, it's the kids."
Malcolm Turnbull probably disappears into his office at times and wants to tear his hair out!
"Fuck nobody, got mine" is a worryingly common position
Jeez at that point they might as well shut it down. Of course I've also said that about the continuous cuts to the Newcastle Herald, which they also own.
Journos might as well try and setup their own bloggish sites.
bobnowhere
Member
Elaugaufein
Member
Getting desperate if they are bringing that out.
Oh does anyone have Brisbane Local Government polling data ? I've noticed Quirk is campaigning barely mentioning the LNP while Harding is running very much as Labor. Usually that means internal polling is very much favouring Labor but Quirk seems to have a considerable personal following and there doesn't seem to be the kind of brewing discontent that sees an incumbent ousted. I'd like to see what the data is saying.
Oh does anyone have Brisbane Local Government polling data ? I've noticed Quirk is campaigning barely mentioning the LNP while Harding is running very much as Labor. Usually that means internal polling is very much favouring Labor but Quirk seems to have a considerable personal following and there doesn't seem to be the kind of brewing discontent that sees an incumbent ousted. I'd like to see what the data is saying.
Proof turnbull is just a Machiavellian schemer. He has principles but they all have a price tag. Anything he can sell for political gain he will and he cedes power to the loudest dog whistlers behind him.
At least with Gillard over rudd we got an improvement. With turnbull over Abbott we got a puppet and a backbench full of ventriloquists.
Elaugaufein
Member
Ventriloquist libel!
I'm not precisely sure what's going on in the senate today but it sounds like the fucking stupidest thing in the world. sounds like labor is doing their best to fillibuster the senate
why labor has to come out swinging for THIS of all things is ridiculous. mandatory child detention a-ok, but they're going to tooth and nail try and slam the greens to the wall with misinformation and great sounding headlines. what a pack of fucking jokers
why labor has to come out swinging for THIS of all things is ridiculous. mandatory child detention a-ok, but they're going to tooth and nail try and slam the greens to the wall with misinformation and great sounding headlines. what a pack of fucking jokers
well the senate reforms are passed.
Also safe schools getting a reworking. on its face sounds like the batshit crazies win, or at least are happy.
Also safe schools getting a reworking. on its face sounds like the batshit crazies win, or at least are happy.
Elaugaufein
Member
The potential costs of slamming the Greens is generally lower which is why Labor is doing so. The Greens are still bound to support whatever progressive policy Labor may need them to pass while your swing voters are more likely to be pleased by Labor slamming the Greens than the Coalition.
Requiring parental consent kinda completely fucks the program up if you have lgbti kids with conservative and/or religious parents =\
Elaugaufein
Member
That's kind of the point of these changes, to make it completely inoffensive to religious conservatives until it can be defunded (as scheduled, whereas it probably would have been quietly renewed before).
bobnowhere
Member
It's hard to tell exactly what's going on but the program has been gutted, won't be refunded in the next round and if anyone complains it will be suspended immediately. The fact that Christensen is thriled with the result is worrisome.
Maybe every MP gets a donut or something.
bobnowhere
Member
Shorten made a good point yesterday, yes another one (!), that if you give into the bullies and they just come back wanting more. I'm sure the SSM plebiscite will pop back up again in the next couple of weeks, changing the public voting requirements or enshrining that it is not binding on members of parliament. Something like if it doesn't reach 50% in your electorate you are not bound by the overall vote or maybe even 2/3rds etc...
You know they are up to something.
You know they are up to something.
Though havent some states said they'll make up the shortfall.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked