Skip to content

Live Exports: The next great issue to Disappear under Abbott’s Government

October 31, 2013

Australia-investigates-sheep-export-allegations

Following on from its success in addressing climate change by making it just “disappear,” and similarly eliminating any discussion of asylum seeker arrivals from public sight, Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce has today announced that the Government will scrap the Live Export Independent Inspector for Animal Welfare position.

The move follows a report on ABC television that showed Australian sheep being brutally slaughtered in Jordan.

Tony Abbott has called the footage as “disturbing” but defended live exports as a “good system”.

The prime minister said the video – taken by Animals Australia  – is being “investigated” by the government.

“If someone has done the wrong thing, suitable action will be taken,” Mr Abbott told reporters in Melbourne.

“If the rules have been broken, well we’ll ensure that ends and that the rules are enforced.”

The video, which has been sent to the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF), was gathered during the Eid al-Adha – or Festival of Sacrifice – in Jordan in mid-October.

The footage shows sheep being dragged along the ground, thrown into car boots and carved open at the throat.

In one scene, four dying sheep lie twitching in an open street alongside the still body of a fifth, which has had its neck bent backwards after being cut open.

The images have rekindled debate about Australia’s live export trade, with Animals Australia saying 10,000 Australian sheep were sold outside the current Exporter Supply Chain Assurance Scheme (ESCAS).

Independent MP Andrew Wilkie said the footage was sickening and asked how many more instances of animal cruelty had to emerge before the government acted.

“There is no doubt that Australia’s live animal export trade is systemically cruel,” Mr Wilkie told reporters, adding that current regulations are inadequate and it is a “furphy” that markets demand live animals.

But Mr Abbott on Thursday repeatedly backed live exports and the ESCAS system, saying it was designed to ensure animals are not mistreated.

“I caught some of the vision this morning, and yes it was disturbing,” Mr Abbott said.

“But it is a very foolish government that makes policy on the run on the basis of one or two media reports.

“We are not going to play games with our customers. We’re not going to play games with the food security of other countries.”

The prime minister said it was important the live export industry operate on a sound footing.

Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce earlier ruled out stopping live exports to Jordan.

Jordan was Australia’s third biggest market for live sheep exports and halting that trade would only harm Australian producers, he said.

And we can’t have that now, can we.

 

 

Advertisements
149 Comments leave one →
  1. October 31, 2013 3:57 pm

    If we are going to export meat,animals have to be killed, that is the unassailable fact and when it comes down to it what constitutes cruelty in slaughter is not entirely objective and varies from culture to culture. Admittedly I have not seen the footage but from the description in this piece the killing does not sound particularly cruel slitting the throat of a sheep is relatively quick way to kill them.
    That said what do you expect in countries that base their slaughter practices on their religious dogma?
    Industrial scale abattoirs?

    Joyce is right to suggest that most of our customers do the right thing when it comes to animal treatment and it would be wrong to punish all for the actions of a very small percentage who are cruel to animals

  2. October 31, 2013 4:51 pm

    The point I’m making Hall, which you managed to miss entirely, is that this so-called Govt has a track record in its relatively short history in just making things “disappear”.

    Don’t like the pesky “scientific facts” of climate change? Fine, just scrap the Climate Change Commission…

    Troubled by those persistent asylum seekers who keep coming here by boat? No problem, just stop reporting it.

    And now we have the govt scrapping role of the person responsible for overseeing animal welfare of Live Exports…

    I mean, if you don’t anyone to report it, then I guess it doesn’t really exist, right?

  3. Splatterbottom permalink
    October 31, 2013 5:15 pm

    I think you have the gist of their policy, reb. Hiding facts means less questions means lying less. For example, now Morrison only has to lie once a week.

  4. October 31, 2013 5:53 pm

    reb

    The point I’m making Hall, which you managed to miss entirely, is that this so-called Govt has a track record in its relatively short history in just making things “disappear”.

    Nothing has been made to “disappear” under this government, you are just having withdrawal symptoms because unlike the previous Labor governments the Abbott administration does not feel the need to be in the media every minute of everyday

    Don’t like the pesky “scientific facts” of climate change? Fine, just scrap the Climate Change Commission…

    Oh come off it Reb, if ever there was a useless quango it was the Climate Change Commission. and the fact that they have been able to get the climate change faithful to fund their activities proves that government money was unnecessary. tell me one thing that the CCC have offered that has was worth the money. You know some unique insights that we could not do without. The truth is that all they have ever done is recycle the same propaganda as every other alarmist organisation.

    Troubled by those persistent asylum seekers who keep coming here by boat? No problem, just stop reporting it.

    Once a week reporting seems enough to me, especially as the numbers are now well down on what they were under Labor.

    And now we have the govt scrapping role of the person responsible for overseeing animal welfare of Live Exports…

    Be real the position was created under Gillard and no one has actually ever taken up the job so what have we lost here? Nothing.

    I mean, if you don’t anyone to report it, then I guess it doesn’t really exist, right?

    When it comes to animal cruelty in jurisdiction that we have no control over what would you have us do? call in an air-strike to take out sloppy butchers? The fact of the mater is that we just can not force other countries to kill the animals they want to eat entirely the way that we would like the only instrument that the Australian government has is to ban the trade and that worked real well for Gillard didn’t it?

    I can not find the footage in question but found this and ask you if this was the style of slaughter that you find so cruel:

    If it is you will note that from cut till death takes less than a minute and the sheep does not seem to suffer that much.

  5. October 31, 2013 6:01 pm

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘this so-called Govt has a track record in its relatively short history in just making things “disappear”.’ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘
    .
    l agree.
    Under Howard`s re-heated zombies, corporate `problems` will disappear faster than bottom-rung-workers benefits.

  6. TB Queensland permalink
    October 31, 2013 6:29 pm

    Admittedly I have not seen the footage but from the description in this piece the killing does not sound particularly cruel slitting the throat of a sheep is relatively quick way to kill them

    It is … but these amateur Dicks take a few slices before they cut the throat but NOT the fkn artery!

    “If the rules have been broken, well we’ll ensure that ends and that the rules are enforced.”

    Fudge, fudge …. “our” rules haven’t been broken … we can’t dictate to other countries … and therefore we have nothing to enforce …

    “We are not going to play games with our customers. We’re not going to play games with the food security of other countries.”

    … and shit happens … and we can’t stop making money!

    There should be an iView of Lateline … gotta go out so I’ll check when I come back!

  7. October 31, 2013 6:57 pm

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘If the rules have been broken,’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘Fudge, fudge __ “our” rules haven’t been broken’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    .
    more like fraud,
    the livestock association were taking $-per-head from cattle farmers to ensure off-shore slaughtering was done to code, a small fact the teabags run from, at speed, as this was pre-kevin07, not sure if `howard` or earlier
    .
    .
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘amateur Dicks take a few slices before they cut the throat but NOT the fkn artery!’ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘
    and this is all on the teabags, who can`t even enforce their-own industry standards for their-OWN good, *half-wits*
    but when shit-hits-fan teabags want to bleat over Joolya`s reaction, even tho, prevention was always in the teabags hands, *teabags-arse-fcuked-themselves*

  8. TB Queensland permalink
    October 31, 2013 7:41 pm

    Lateline … from 5:50

    http://www.abc.net.au/iview/#/view/75455467

  9. October 31, 2013 10:02 pm

    Reb maybe the Liberals can do us all a favor make Hall disappear?

  10. Walrus permalink
    October 31, 2013 11:20 pm

    AACo which exports live beef monitored when landing in Indo is building an abbatoir in Darwin. I think the closest large scale equivalent is in Townsville.

    So they see the value in vacuum packed added value meat

    Self disclosure I own shares in them as always .

  11. Walrus permalink
    October 31, 2013 11:21 pm

    By the way these are not cattle of the type Australian capital city consumers are used to.

  12. egg permalink
    November 1, 2013 8:33 am

    ‘ISLAMIC leaders have called on animal-rights activists to show greater religious and cultural tolerance in the debate over live exports.’ Oz

    Fkn medieval barbarians.

  13. November 1, 2013 8:37 am

    Ricky

    Take care of those anger levels matey…

  14. November 1, 2013 4:32 pm

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘Could there ever be a topic that gives as freely as the push for same sex marriage? It certainly is a cause that arouses great passion form its advocates’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    http://iainhall.wordpress.com/2013/10/31/the-follies-of-an-over-blown-town-council/
    .
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘many of whom try very hard to berate, bully and intimidate their interlocutors’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    *Wot. they use teabag tactics.?
    .
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘when they can not convince them that marriage is only about “love”.’ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘
    *maybe it`s about equality too.?
    .
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘If the lesson of human history tells us anything’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    *here it comes
    .
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘it is that marriage is about many things but prime amongst them is the formalising of a pair bond for the purpose of propagating the species.’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    *Guffaw.
    *even before they tumbled out of the tree-tops, humans spent centuries shagging who they want and when they want 😆
    .
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘As someone who does not endorse changes to the marriage act I have been subject to the abuse I mention.’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    *self abuse doesn`t count
    .
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘As I have previously argued I don’t think that “marriage” is really desired by same sex couples,’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    *yeah, teh-gays are spending their efforts on something they don`t want 🙄

  15. November 1, 2013 7:42 pm

    cabbages
    feel free to re post your comment at my blog and I will happily argue the topic there,

  16. egg permalink
    November 1, 2013 7:49 pm

    I’m almost speechless. Mon petit chou don’t go.

  17. paul permalink
    November 1, 2013 8:33 pm

    argue, more like abuse, bully, intimidation by hall

  18. November 1, 2013 10:20 pm

    Paul
    what a hypocritical response from you!

  19. November 1, 2013 11:10 pm

    Fuck off hall crawl back under your rock…you redneck, welfare bludging, hypocritical, pantry waist smeg

  20. paul permalink
    November 1, 2013 11:19 pm

    Hall, maybe you should listen to your kids some more, they seem to know more of what is going on in the world then what you do.

  21. November 1, 2013 11:52 pm

    Still can`t post at your site Iain.
    Since wordpress upgraded l seem to be unable to post on blogs with either new themes or new widgets, not sure which. (coz my old computer) l`ve also lost the `Like` button/widget, anybody else missing the wordpress `Like` button too, or just me.?

  22. November 2, 2013 4:24 am

    Ricky Pann

    Fuck off hall crawl back under your rock…you redneck, welfare bludging, hypocritical, pantry waist smeg

    Why is it that you go around the internet trying to act as a roving bully boy? Attempting to usurp the role of the blog owners to decide who can comment on the threads they post?

    Paul

    Hall, maybe you should listen to your kids some more, they seem to know more of what is going on in the world then what you do.

    I constantly listen to my kids Paul, but that does not oblige me to abandon reason and just accept the things that they say in error. As they come to me for advice about the big questions about life I think that I still have an edge in the knowledge department. That said they both leave you for dead in terms of their intellect , humanity and emotional maturity.

    Cheers Cabbages

    Still can`t post at your site Iain.
    Since wordpress upgraded l seem to be unable to post on blogs with either new themes or new widgets, not sure which. (coz my old computer) l`ve also lost the `Like` button/widget, anybody else missing the wordpress `Like` button too, or just me.?

    Sorry to hear that, My theme and widgets have been unchanged for a long time. are you logged into WP when you have tried to comment? I really think that you should not be having any trouble but if it persists try contacting WP support which is usually pretty good.

  23. paul permalink
    November 2, 2013 6:55 am

    Well, your kid’s have not seen your web site then have they, as it lacks intelligence, its is racist, its full of sock-puppets, your bloggers are not at all smart, they follow the owner, dull and boring, live in a cave, are racist as well.

  24. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    November 2, 2013 10:02 am

    ”Attempting to usurp the role of the blog owners to decide who can comment on the threads they post?

    One of the appealing features of this site is that the blog owner allows this type of unregulated exchange!
    ——-
    I’m of to Derby Day, to observe plenty of inebriated young women, and some not so young. It’s a great day for sports fans!

  25. egg permalink
    November 2, 2013 10:37 am

    ‘…unregulated exchange!’

    A free and open discourse in a robust environment, troll free.

    Good punting ToM.

  26. paul permalink
    November 2, 2013 12:57 pm

    I constantly listen to my kids Paul, but that does not oblige me to abandon reason and just accept the things that they say in error. As they come to me for advice about the big questions about life I think that I still have an edge in the knowledge department.

    So what you are saying is Hall, your kids have a right to say whatever they want, but they have to believe what you say, because of your so called knowledge. That is the biggest joke I have heard for years, you and knowledge. 😆 😆 😆

    Maybe you should read this article, you might actually learn something about life.

    http://www.smh.com.au/comment/how-michael-kirby-saved-my-life-20131101-2ws8h.html

  27. November 2, 2013 1:58 pm

    Paul

    So what you are saying is Hall, your kids have a right to say whatever they want, but they have to believe what you say, because of your so called knowledge. That is the biggest joke I have heard for years, you and knowledge. 😆 😆 😆

    No Paul I am not silly enough to think that I can impose my own beliefs upon my children, I do however think that there is no sin in making the arguments to them that explain why I think that they are wrong about something, that is after all the role of a parent, to teach our offspring what we ourselves have learnt about the world. If I manage to convince them that my position is correct well that is very good, If they remain unconvinced then its no problem for me either. If you were a parent (and its obvious that you aren’t) you might just understand that.Unlike you I am not at all inclined towards totalitarian thinking so I work to persuade those I seek to influence and give respect to those I disagree with rather than deriding them personally. You should try it sometimes and you might find that you earn a bit more respect instead of disdain.

    Maybe you should read this article, you might actually learn something about life.

    That is an interesting citation Paul but it actually supports my contention that the real issue for gay marriage advocates is not the desire to partner with the person of their choice (because they can openly do so within our society) but to acquire social endorsement for their sexuality. I just don’t think changing the definition of marriage will achieve that underlying desire. Frankly the road to social acceptance and endorsement has no legislative short cuts.

    How many times do I have to say that I fully endorse the right of every human being over the age of consent engaging in any kind of sexual activity with consensual partners that pleases them? How many times do I have to explain to you that I have absolutely no issue with either the concept or the open expression of homosexuality? You seem to have a rather sadly polarised view about the subject that allows for no divergence from the leftist orthodoxy on the subject.

  28. TB Queensland permalink
    November 2, 2013 2:13 pm

    One of the appealing features of this site is that the blog owner allows this type of unregulated exchange!

    I agree, ToM … I’m thoroughly enjoying my popcorn and cider as I read through these freds … personal insults thrown at each other by relatively new commenters here is refreshingly boring … very cliquey …

    I’m, sure, sreb, is giggling into his shiraz cocqutail right now … how amusement … and the bubbles … oh, the bubbles …

    er, whack $10 each way, number six, closest race to 3:00pm (always pays, wherever you are – uncanny) my old man used to work at Eagle Farm here in Brissy …

  29. November 2, 2013 3:17 pm

    “The real issue for hetrosexual marriage advocates is not the desire to partner with the person of their choice (because they can openly do so within our society) but to acquire gay endorsement for their sexuality”..

    See how fkn ridiculously warped your so-called “opinion” is Hall?

  30. paul permalink
    November 2, 2013 3:24 pm

    So Hall, did u just get married to shag the misses and have kids, if not what was the real reason????

    It cannot be because of love, as that would throw your argument out the window.

  31. TB Queensland permalink
    November 2, 2013 3:28 pm

    LOL! @sreb and paul … BTW g’day paul …

    Did you just get up, sreb?

  32. paul permalink
    November 2, 2013 3:33 pm

    g’day TB

  33. paul permalink
    November 2, 2013 3:43 pm

    You seem to have a rather sadly polarised view about the subject that allows for no divergence from the leftist orthodoxy on the subject.

    Hall, it does not matter what side of politics I follow, or anyone follows, left, right conservative, it is about equality, there are even people in the coalition who believe in marriage equality, as against it. just as there are people in the labor party who are against it, and for marriage equality.

  34. November 2, 2013 3:49 pm

    “Did you just get up, sreb?”

    Nope, just got home – I’ve been out all day enjoying the Sun… 🙂

  35. November 2, 2013 4:24 pm

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘Unlike you I am not at all inclined towards totalitarian thinking’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    .
    l would suggest you actually check the definition of `totalitarian`
    The anti-gay-sorry-euthanasia-abortion teabags are much closer to the totalitarian/fascism end of the scale, than the teabags opponents, which aren`t necessarily teh-Left either.
    .
    .
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘can impose my own beliefs upon my children,’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘making the arguments to them that explain why I think’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    .
    actually l disagree,
    dog-bothering has survived for centuries, by father to son indoctrination of fables
    .
    .
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘the role of a parent, to teach our offspring what we ourselves have learnt’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    .
    unfortunately, most people pass on as much `bad` information as `good`

  36. paul permalink
    November 2, 2013 4:28 pm

    it is that marriage is about many things but prime amongst them is the formalising of a pair bond for the purpose of propagating the species.

    So Hall, if your wife is past the age of concieving any more kids, why not divorce her, tell her you want to propagate the species, it’s not that you love her or anything, as that is not what marriage is about, at least from your view anyway, find some new hotty, shag her, then you would be in your element. Then do it all over again, considering that is your view of marriage.

  37. TB Queensland permalink
    November 2, 2013 5:11 pm

    I’ve been out all day enjoying the Sun…

    BS! You live in Melbourne … oh, how long were you actually IN the sun for? Did you mean looking for the sun?

    Beautiful here, clear blue skies, gentle seabreeze, the lorikeets chattering in the trees just behind me … a typical Brissy day … 😛

  38. November 2, 2013 5:15 pm

    reb


    See how fkn ridiculously warped your so-called “opinion” is Hall?

    Are you denying that what you want from changing the definition of marriage is something other than social affirmation of your sexuality?

    paul

    So Hall, did u just get married to shag the misses and have kids, if not what was the real reason????

    It cannot be because of love, as that would throw your argument out the window.

    Have you ever had an enduring relationship Paul? I doubt it because if you had you would realise that the way that any couple make their partnership has very little to do with what it is called.

    Hall, it does not matter what side of politics I follow, or anyone follows, left, right conservative, it is about equality, there are even people in the coalition who believe in marriage equality, as against it. Just as there are people in the Labor party who are against it, and for marriage equality.

    Sure I understand that this is an issue that crosses political boundaries, what of it? When it comes to equality the most important aspect of it when it comes to anyone’s sexuality is that we are all free to partner with the person of our choice. The irony that I pointed out in my post seems to have escaped both you and reb, namely I have long advocated a form of civil union to cover homosexual couples and in essence that is precisely what has been created by that glorified town council in Canberra. Of course there are a couple of reasons that I still have a problem with it, firstly there is the semantics of the bill’s title but more importantly I agree with those who say that such things should be the remit of the commonwealth rather than the states or territories. That said I have lost count of the times that advocates have insisted that “Civil union” was not enough. in fact I take heart from the revelation that for those who so vociferously endorse the ACT act that civil unions clearly are adequate.

    Paul
    Re your comment of November 2, 2013 4:28 pm

    Before you dis my family further just consider why you don’t have a wife and children of your own

  39. November 2, 2013 5:28 pm

    “Are you denying that what you want from changing the definition of marriage is something other than social affirmation of your sexuality?”

    Yes.

  40. November 2, 2013 5:43 pm

    Cheers Cabbages

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘Unlike you I am not at all inclined towards totalitarian thinking’ ‘ ‘ ‘

    .
    l would suggest you actually check the definition of `totalitarian`
    The anti-gay-sorry-euthanasia-abortion teabags are much closer to the totalitarian/fascism end of the scale, than the teabags opponents, which aren`t necessarily teh-Left either.

    I have a very good grasp of the definition of totalitarianism which is why i think that Paul is an example of the breed. That said I am not anti-Gay even though I do not endorse changes to the marriage act, I do think that apologies can be over valued, any liberalisation of euthanasia worries me but I would also not berate anyone for deciding when they want to go if they have a terminal condition, Abortion is an issue of competing imperatives that change in their weighting the longer that gestation progresses. That said totalitarianism is about the wish to impose an orthodoxy upon a society and there have been examples of that form both the right and the left both are equally abhorrent to me.
    .

    ‘ ‘ ‘can impose my own beliefs upon my children,’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘making the arguments to them that explain why I think’ ‘ ‘ ‘

    .
    actually l disagree,
    dog-bothering has survived for centuries, by father to son indoctrination of fables

    You are barking up the wrong tree on that one mate, I am a life long atheist and we have a 100% secular household. That said I am sure that you would not berate me for trying to imbue my children with notions of kindness, honesty and compassion would you? The only fable that has ever had currency in our house was the existence of Santa and the tooth fairy and both only lasted because the kids loved them even when they had so clearly worked out that the presents and money came from their mother and I .

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘the role of a parent, to teach our offspring what we ourselves have learnt’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    .
    unfortunately, most people pass on as much `bad` information as `good`

    Maybe so Cabbages but its one of the rights of parenting that we get to pass on not only our DNA but also the other aspects of our life experience. The children we make are, after all, our one real chance at a continued existence (of a sort) after we die..

  41. November 2, 2013 5:44 pm

    So Reb
    what do you think such a change would do for you were it to come to pass?

  42. November 2, 2013 5:45 pm

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘you would realise that the way that any couple make their partnership has very little to do with what it is called.’ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘
    .
    by that metric, teabags should not oppose gay-marriage then,
    and could probably be applied to `abortion` and `voluntary-euthanasia` too
    .
    .
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘Are you denying that what you want from changing the definition of marriage is something other than social affirmation of your sexuality?’ ‘ ‘ ‘

    ‘ ‘ ‘Yes.’ ‘ ‘ _ (reb)
    CAN YOU SAY _ EQUALITY

  43. TB Queensland permalink
    November 2, 2013 5:54 pm

    I take heart from the revelation that for those who so vociferously endorse the ACT act that civil unions clearly are adequate.

    But, IH, it isn’t about YOU.

    There are people in love who want to get married – in church – and people like you deny them that right as human beings not to be married in a church … its about human respect for everyone’s rights … not just your religious beliefs … power … and control.

  44. November 2, 2013 5:58 pm

    Cheers Cabbages

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘you would realise that the way that any couple make their partnership has very little to do with what it is called.’ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘
    .
    by that metric, teabags should not oppose gay-marriage then,

    No I was talking about the partnerships, or pair bonds for which no social imprimatur is necessary..

    and could probably be applied to `abortion` and `voluntary-euthanasia` too

    How so?

    .

    .
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘Are you denying that what you want from changing the definition of marriage is something other than social affirmation of your sexuality?’ ‘ ‘ ‘

    ‘ ‘ ‘Yes.’ ‘ ‘ _ (reb)
    CAN YOU SAY _ EQUALITY

    Can you define EQUALITY, in detail?

  45. November 2, 2013 6:01 pm

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘There are people in love who want to get married – in church – and people like you deny them that right as human beings not to be married in a church’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    .
    TB, l think you`re a bit wrong here mate,
    Church=private-club,
    This won`t fly for most dog-botherers, and don`t think gays are even fighting for this,
    .
    Govt/State should not be `phobic` under so-called `equality` in a so-called `democracy`.
    .
    (Tho reb may need to correct here)

  46. November 2, 2013 6:10 pm

    TB

    There are people in love who want to get married – in church – and people like you deny them that right as human beings not to be married in a church … its about human respect for everyone’s rights … not just your religious beliefs … power … and control.

    There is not one Gay marriage jurisdiction that I know of that even attempts to force churches to perform same sex weddings its always a civil ceremony that is advocated for and in fact most jurisdictions give specific exemptions from litigation under “anti discrimination” statutes to prevent those with a religious objection being required to offer either their time or churches for Gay weddings.
    That said you would be mistaken to think that I have any desire to impose my position upon others I do however feel no guilt about trying to persuade other that mine ids the correct position. Isn’t that the essence of democracy?

  47. November 2, 2013 6:17 pm

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘Can you define EQUALITY, in detail?’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    l don`t use `code` from teabag-hq lain,
    and l use words that mean same as `dictionary`,
    .
    know how`ta use a dictionary.?

  48. Meta permalink
    November 2, 2013 6:51 pm

    (I don’t really have an issue with divorced and remarried lesbian priestesses officiating before God and Man at solemn same-sex marriage ceremonies in the Reuniting Catholic Rainbow Church, either, Iain. Glad we’re all agreed on the possibilities and practicalities of essential matters.)

  49. November 2, 2013 6:52 pm

    “Can you define EQUALITY, in detail?”

    Probably. If I could be bothered…

    Can you define bigotry, and defend it?

  50. November 2, 2013 6:59 pm

    And another thing, subscribing to Liberal Party doctrine doesn’t suddenly make you rich, independently wealthy, “superior,” a lawyer, or an unabashed fundamental dog-botherer but I can see how that would appeal to someone who’s languishing in the lower socio-economic scale and basically unemployable.

  51. November 2, 2013 11:32 pm

    Cheers Cabbages

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘Can you define EQUALITY, in detail?’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    l don`t use `code` from teabag-hq lain,
    and l use words that mean same as `dictionary`,
    .
    know how`ta use a dictionary.?

    I’m just trying to find out what you understand by the term but I suspect that you are using snark and sarcasm to cover the fact that you have given very little though about just what is meant by equality.

    reb

    “Can you define EQUALITY, in detail?”

    Probably. If I could be bothered…

    Can you define bigotry, and defend it?

    Why would I want to “defend” bigotry? your suggestion says more about you than it does about me though

    And another thing, subscribing to Liberal Party doctrine doesn’t suddenly make you rich, independently wealthy, “superior,” a lawyer, or an unabashed fundamental dog-botherer but I can see how that would appeal to someone who’s languishing in the lower socio-economic scale and basically unemployable.

    I am endlessly amused by lefties like yourself` who think that wealth is measured in money. or that that someone like me is at all concerned about social status. Frankly I see a projection of your own aspirations and insecurities in that attempt at a put down.`

  52. November 3, 2013 12:53 am

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘I do think that apologies can be over valued,’ ‘ ‘ ‘

    Yes, and teabag lunacy prevents you seeing the `other` values.
    .
    As a more `financial-conservative` myself,
    (Let`s ignore the correct verses incorrect aspect)
    my employee`s, whom l pay 190k_pa plus perks `starting` salary,
    now no longer waste their working hours having to come up with fables `justifying` why NOT-to-say-sorry, as it is now done and dusted, and they no longer get beaten about the head with the `sorry`baton by the embedded-media.
    .
    ln most `topics` teabag lunacy always fails to see `other` conservative views too, and your reply`s that bleat `teh-Left` are actually so very incorrect many a time.

  53. paul permalink
    November 3, 2013 1:03 am

    You seem to have a rather sadly polarised view about the subject that allows for no divergence from the leftist orthodoxy on the subject.

    Hall, here you have said it a leftist orthodoxy, but then you say this.

    Sure I understand that this is an issue that crosses political boundaries, what of it?

    So what is it Hall, a lefty problem or does it cover all political spectrum. In your case you always blame the left.

  54. paul permalink
    November 3, 2013 1:18 am

    Hall, I’ll dis on your family when ever I want to, and hall, you have stated many times that the major reason for marriage is just to propagate the species, and I stand by my comments about your life, why did you get married, was it to just propagate the species, as you say.

  55. November 3, 2013 1:37 am

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘I am a life long atheist’ ‘ ‘ ‘

    Maybe so. But you are not a `critical-thinker/comprehensive-conservative` either. Your talk-points are straight from the `Church-of-teabag` and answers are recitals of the`teabag-bible-handbook`. You always fail to justify the waste of my over-paid employee`s time (as_above) which can also be applied to gay-marriage, abortion, voluntary-euthanasia and probably most other topics under the `Personal-Liberty`s banner.
    .
    Teabags are NOT making the case on the financial side, why so much money should go up in smoke to oppose these topics. Remember, these things are voluntary/private, exactly the same as driving a car. lf you choose to drive a car, then you go get a licence. Nobody is forced by Govt to be a motorist. lf gays want to get married, Let`em, nobody will be forcing you to be `gay-married` or force you to attend `gay-weddings`.
    .
    The same `choice` argument is valid for voluntary-euthanasia and abortion. lt is now time for teabags to justify the waste of taxpayers money via politicians time, in opposing personal Liberty`s. Crunch-time, put-up or
    .
    (this is not teh-usa, wasting 50-million$ taxpayer cash screeching about a penis, a vagina, and an unwashed dress is not responsible finance #clinton-Monica)

  56. egg permalink
    November 3, 2013 7:48 am

    ‘…why did you get married, was it to just propagate the species, as you say.’

    I’ll jump in here, men don’t marry to propagate the species, they reluctantly tie the knot for regular sex to alleviate the constant hunger.

    The reason women marry is so they are not seen by other women as lose. This is a complex issue, beyond male understanding, but at this early stage I suggest women are not really all that interested in male hunger and marry for material security.

    This is where the battle of the sexes comes from. Dog made a huge blunder and that’s why we don’t have heaven on earth.

  57. egg permalink
    November 3, 2013 8:05 am

    I only came down in the last shower and not fully conversant in human folly.

    ‘THEY fake orgasms, lie about being in the mood and almost one-in-10 have been pressured into sexual activity they’ve regretted in the morning – and that’s just the blokes.’

    Noone in the Daily Terror

  58. November 3, 2013 8:32 am

    @7.48 @8.05 ‘ 😆 ‘ 😆 ‘ 😆 ‘ 😆 ‘ 😆 ‘ 😆
    EXCELLENT WORK EGG

  59. November 3, 2013 10:57 am

    Cheers Cabbages

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘I do think that apologies can be over valued,’ ‘ ‘ ‘

    Yes, and teabag lunacy prevents you seeing the `other` values.

    Hmm, I suspect that you think that “seeing” other values means agreeing with them but as it happens I have no problem at all with understanding that we all perceive things differently and that in many instances there is not a dichotomy between corroect and incorrect
    .

    As a more `financial-conservative` myself,
    (Let`s ignore the correct verses incorrect aspect)
    my employee`s, whom l pay 190k_pa plus perks `starting` salary,
    now no longer waste their working hours having to come up with fables `justifying` why NOT-to-say-sorry, as it is now done and dusted, and they no longer get beaten about the head with the `sorry`baton by the embedded-media.

    what does this mean?
    .

    ln most `topics` teabag lunacy always fails to see `other` conservative views too, and your reply`s that bleat `teh-Left` are actually so very incorrect many a time.

    It seems to me that if I am sinning by using a “leftist” umbrella to describe a part of teh polity you commit the same sin by using “tea-bag” in the same way
    paul

    You seem to have a rather sadly polarised view about the subject that allows for no divergence from the leftist orthodoxy on the subject.

    Hall, here you have said it a leftist orthodoxy, but then you say this.

    Sure I understand that this is an issue that crosses political boundaries, what of it?

    So what is it Hall, a lefty problem or does it cover all political spectrum. In your case you always blame the left.

    In the first instance I was talking about what YOU personally believe and in the second I was accepting that across the members of parliament there is a range of views. There is no contradiction in my position here, The problem is that you are incapable of clearly comprehending any sort of nuance and you are blinded by your desperate need to win even when you are totally out of your intellectual depth.

    Hall, I’ll dis on your family when ever I want to,

    Sure and you will diminish yourself every time that you do so

    and hall, you have stated many times that the major reason for marriage is just to propagate the species, and I stand by my comments about your life, why did you get married, was it to just propagate the species, as you say.

    Do you even understand the difference between a generality and the specific? Clearly you don’t.

    Cheers Cabbages

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘I am a life long atheist’ ‘ ‘ ‘

    Maybe so. But you are not a `critical-thinker/comprehensive-conservative` either.

    is there an exam that one has to pass to be a conservative? My personal philosophy is enunciated in the pages of my blog so if you wish to understand it better then feel free to read it.

    Your talk-points are straight from the `Church-of-teabag` and answers are recitals of the`teabag-bible-handbook`.

    Don’t confuse my love of rhetoric using religious iconography with me having any sort of belief in the supernatural or the existence of any sort of deity.

    You always fail to justify the waste of my over-paid employee`s time (as_above) which can also be applied to gay-marriage, abortion, voluntary-euthanasia and probably most other topics under the `Personal-Liberty`s banner.

    Oh I get it the “employees” you talk about are our MPs 🙄
    .

    Teabags are NOT making the case on the financial side, why so much money should go up in smoke to oppose these topics.

    that sounds to me like you oppose any sort of democracy that represents the full spectrum of public opinion. In nay event at the level of the public debate its the unpaid members of the politically active class who make the arguments for and against and long may it be so. Democracy requires robust debate whic seesm to be an anathema to you.

    Remember, these things are voluntary/private, exactly the same as driving a car. lf you choose to drive a car, then you go get a licence. Nobody is forced by Govt to be a motorist. lf gays want to get married, Let`em, nobody will be forcing you to be `gay-married` or force you to attend `gay-weddings`.

    if these issues are just voluntary/private as you contend then why do they need the imprimatur of legislation? could it be that all of these issues have aspects that extend beyond the personal? that said I find it amusing that you should invoke the analogy with driving a car but lets run with that for a moment or two shall we? When we drive a car its not something that involves only us as the drive of the machine there are potential repercussions for other road users. Likewise if we change the definition of marriage what will the consequences be?
    .

    The same `choice` argument is valid for voluntary-euthanasia and abortion. lt is now time for teabags to justify the waste of taxpayers money via politicians time, in opposing personal Liberty`s. Crunch-time, put-up or

    Euthanasia is quite rightly a vexed issue and clearly not as simple as you contend. Personally I think that making it difficult provides a protection against vulnerable people being coerced into suicide. As I suggested earlier abortion is not the simple issue that the feministas would have use believe. It all turns upon when we accept the humanity of the unborn. Personally I take the view that as the gestation progresses the greater the justification for a termination has to be because the humanity of the unborn becomes ever more undeniable.
    .

    egg

    ‘…why did you get married, was it to just propagate the species, as you say.’

    I’ll jump in here, men don’t marry to propagate the species, they reluctantly tie the knot for regular sex to alleviate the constant hunger.

    Well I would say that the “hunger” exists not just because of a desire for the physical pleasure of sex but because we all have the biological imperative to propagate the species.

    The reason women marry is so they are not seen by other women as lose. This is a complex issue, beyond male understanding, but at this early stage I suggest women are not really all that interested in male hunger and marry for material security.

    You are single aren’t you?

    This is where the battle of the sexes comes from. Dog made a huge blunder and that’s why we don’t have heaven on earth.

    Sou sound like a utopian socialist

  60. egg permalink
    November 3, 2013 11:10 am

    ‘we all have the biological imperative to propagate the species.’

    That’s the big picture item, but on the ground in the heat of battle, all men want to do is take away the pain.

    ‘You are single aren’t you?’

    I prefer to sleep alone in the attic, on a sponge mattress, with a small window opening onto a grand vista, but I’m not a monk.

    ‘Sou sound like a utopian socialist’

    I cannot deny it.

  61. November 3, 2013 11:47 am

    Egg

    ‘we all have the biological imperative to propagate the species.’

    That’s the big picture item, but on the ground in the heat of battle, all men want to do is take away the pain.

    That sounds like the anguished wail of a man who has lost the race to make a successful pair bond, man to man I suggest that you don’t give up yet.

    ‘You are single aren’t you?’

    I prefer to sleep alone in the attic, on a sponge mattress, with a small window opening onto a grand vista, but I’m not a monk.

    You can’t just be a spectator on life mate,nor can you ignore the biological purpose of sex and that the pleasure of a good shag is not an end in itself.

    ‘You sound like a utopian socialist’

    I cannot deny it.

    Have you read and understood Animal farm?

  62. paul permalink
    November 3, 2013 12:44 pm

    You can tell when Hall has lost the argument, he goes off in tangents, cannot even explain his own views properly, and says it is a leftist problem, I have yet to see hall say anything to back up his arguments on everything, he blames the left for everything that is wrong in this world. If Hall thinks he is so smart, why then is he not in parliament, he could join the anti muslim, anti gay marriage, the anti anything left party, mmm that would make him a red neck then, just like the coalition.

  63. TB Queensland permalink
    November 3, 2013 12:46 pm

    TB, l think you`re a bit wrong here mate,

    You may be right … but my point is that homosexual couples do not have the same choices (RIGHTS) as heterosexual couples … that’s enough for me … I can assure you The Minister and I wouldn’t want to get married in a church these days (we didn’t 45 years ago but our parents had quite a lot of “persuuasion” over us!)

    But we could still get married (again) today … gays and lesbians can’t … that’s simply wrong …

    nullum argumentum

  64. TB Queensland permalink
    November 3, 2013 12:48 pm

    … he blames the left for everything that is wrong in this world …

    Wait till you meet the rest of the team here 😉 🙄 🙄

  65. paul permalink
    November 3, 2013 12:58 pm

    I just like taking the piss out off hall, it is actually fun doing it, seeing him get all worked up trying to defend his position on everything, making him look the fool he is, blaming everyone else for his problems.

  66. November 3, 2013 1:29 pm

    Paul

    You can tell when Hall has lost the argument, he goes off in tangents, cannot even explain his own views properly, and says it is a leftist problem, I have yet to see hall say anything to back up his arguments on everything, he blames the left for everything that is wrong in this world.

    Actually if you go up this thread you will see that it was not I who directed the conversation down this particular path, I recall correctly it was you! I was trying to remain on the topic of animal slaughter in Jordan.As it happens though I don’t play the “blame” game at all. I certainly am happy to call you out on the source of your misguided ideas especially when they are so often only superficially understood by you.

    If Hall thinks he is so smart, why then is he not in parliament, he could join the anti muslim, anti gay marriage, the anti anything left party, mmm that would make him a red neck then, just like the coalition.

    Isn’t it amazing the way that you that you say in one breath that I am “anti muslim, anti gay marriage,” is if both Islam and Gay marriage are in some sort of consensus. The irony and contradiction should not be lost on anyone with a brain perhaps you should consider more deeply just why you give the gay hating Muslims such a free pass for their bigotry

  67. paul permalink
    November 3, 2013 1:30 pm

    Hall, you have said this about gay marriage, this is why you are a bigot and racist.

    The thing is as the advocates o “gay marriage” should make the case for change and sadly most of you are doing a piss-poor job of finding any reason that anyone who opposes Gay unions being called marriage to change our minds.

    The reality is that ” gay marriage” is just window dressing rather than the realm issue. The real issue is that Homosexuals want social affirmation of their sexual orientation and brow-beating the heterosexual majority into allowing them to call their unions marriage will not actually achieve that.
    For as long as homosexuality is inextricably linked to promiscuity and anonymous sex it will never have the respectability and acceptance that so many activists say that they want it to have.

  68. egg permalink
    November 3, 2013 1:37 pm

    ‘That sounds like the anguished wail of a man who has lost the race to make a successful pair bond, man to man I suggest that you don’t give up yet.’

    Ignorant pissant.

  69. egg permalink
    November 3, 2013 1:50 pm

    ‘You can’t just be a spectator on life mate,nor can you ignore the biological purpose of sex and that the pleasure of a good shag is not an end in itself.’

    Don’t call me mate, you ingrate. Once a man has satisfied his primal lust he becomes very calm, he would like it on tap whenever the need strikes, but alas.

    I was watching Dr Oz on daytime TV talking about the male sex drive. His huge audience of adoring women were shocked when he told them they had to relieve their husbands six days a week to avoid prostrate cancer. A large audible groan went up.

  70. November 3, 2013 3:15 pm

    Your teabag-bible gish-gallop reply`s are unworthy lain,
    the meat-and-potatoes of my previous TWO posts were about WASTE OF TAXPAYER CASH, a conservative position, which you just ran away from.

    Brandis is about to run a teabag idiocy project, and take to the high-court to `over-tune` approved `gay-marriage` in TAS and ACT, which will not only bonfire Federal cash, but also bonfire TAS cash and bonfire ACT cash, as they will be forced into court-costs to defend.

    The howard regime did the same with voluntary-euthanasia in the NT. Considering these are personal/private choices,(like driving a car), it is the teabag-lunacy that demands to bonfire taxpayer cash while demanding to overturn state/territory personal liberty`s.

  71. November 3, 2013 3:22 pm

    By the way lain, teabag-lunacy is screaming about `financial-restraint` or `cost-cutting` on one topic, but happy to bonfire endless cash on another.

  72. November 3, 2013 3:35 pm

    paul

    Hall, you have said this about gay marriage, this is why you are a bigot and racist.

    You saying something does not make it so,but lets look in detail at your citation and consider if it has evidence of “bigotry”.

    The thing is as the advocates of “gay marriage” should make the case for change and sadly most of you are doing a piss-poor job of finding any reason that anyone who opposes Gay unions being called marriage to change our minds.

    That is quite reasonable observation of the WAY that the case has been put by many advocates. It does not contain any derision of homosexuals or those straights who have been running with the issue it just suggests that their methods have not been very persuasive. Race is not even an issue here so your score is :
    bigotry — ZERO
    Racism —- ZERO

    The reality is that ” gay marriage” is just window dressing rather than the real issue. The real issue is that Homosexuals want social affirmation of their sexual orientation and brow-beating the heterosexual majority into allowing them to call their unions marriage will not actually achieve that.

    How am I wrong here Paul? how is that evidence of bigotry? or racism?

    bigotry — ZERO
    Racism —- ZERO

    For as long as homosexuality is inextricably linked to promiscuity and anonymous sex it will never have the respectability and acceptance that so many activists say that they want it to have.

    Am I wrong here? to make this observation about the Gay subculture? about the memes epitomised by the Mardi Gras? I am talking about the public image of Gay culture. Not that I care what anyone gay or straight does to get their rocks off as long its done with consensual partners but there are clearly downsides to promiscuity for straits and gays.
    egg

    ‘That sounds like the anguished wail of a man who has lost the race to make a successful pair bond, man to man I suggest that you don’t give up yet.’

    egg

    Ignorant pissant.

    I was right then 😉

    Don’t call me mate, you ingrate. Once a man has satisfied his primal lust he becomes very calm, he would like it on tap whenever the need strikes, but alas.

    Its different when you are in a committed relationship my Ovid friend, its less frenetic and far less a desperate search for that ever greater orgasm.

    I was watching Dr Oz on daytime TV talking about the male sex drive. His huge audience of adoring women were shocked when he told them they had to relieve their husbands six days a week to avoid prostrate cancer. A large audible groan went up.

    I don’t blame the audience or even you for being embarrassed by such a suggestion and I even tend to agree one of the most important things anyone has to learn in a relationship is just how to negotiate for the frequency of sex that each partner needs or wants.
    Anyway what are you doing watching such rubbish daytime TV?
    That stuff will rot your socks!

  73. egg permalink
    November 3, 2013 3:52 pm

    This conversation is getting weird, Hall. I’m stayin’ out the back.

  74. November 3, 2013 4:01 pm

    Cheers Cabbages

    Your teabag-bible gish-gallop reply`s are unworthy lain,
    the meat-and-potatoes of my previous TWO posts were about WASTE OF TAXPAYER CASH, a conservative position, which you just ran away from.

    I can only work with what you give me cabbages and if your intention was to talk about WASTE OF TAXPAYER CASH then why do your words not make that clear?

    Brandis is about to run a teabag idiocy project, and take to the high-court to `over-tune` approved `gay-marriage` in TAS and ACT, which will not only bonfire Federal cash, but also bonfire TAS cash and bonfire ACT cash, as they will be forced into court-costs to defend.

    You do understand that in our system of federal government that there are issues that are raised by state or territory legislation that exceed their remit under the constitution. Brandis is challenging the acts you mention on that basis and it will be up to the courts to decide the matter.how else should such questions of jurisdiction over marriage be decided?

    The Howard regime did the same with voluntary-euthanasia in the NT. Considering these are personal/private choices,(like driving a car), it is the teabag-lunacy that demands to bonfire taxpayer cash while demanding to overturn state/territory personal liberty`s.

    If I recall correctly in the case of the NT euthanasia law it was disallowed by an act of the federal parliament or by simple regulation rather than a court case so the issue of the court costs is moot.

    By the way lain, teabag-lunacy is screaming about `financial-restraint` or `cost-cutting` on one topic, but happy to bonfire endless cash on another.

    All sides of politics can be careless about spending public money and I can think of lots of Labor programs that have been a total write off. Many of the climate change efforts fall into this category so does expenditure on many of their “feel good” social programs.So can we agree that all sides should try harder to get bang for the taxpayer’s bucks?

  75. November 3, 2013 4:10 pm

    Wot. Like this.?
    .
    Teabags are NOT making the case on the financial side, why so much money should go up in smoke to oppose these topics.

  76. November 3, 2013 4:26 pm

    Cabbages

    if that is your standard then perhaps you should allocate blame for the costs upon those who create dodgy legal instruments in the wrong jurisdiction that require then determinations in the courts.
    I can see the seat of your problem and that has to be a belief that things you like should not be challenged by those who disagree with your position..

  77. November 3, 2013 4:29 pm

    “I can see the seat of your problem and that has to be a belief that things you like should not be challenged by those who disagree with your position..”

    Oh the irony…. 🙄

  78. November 3, 2013 4:37 pm

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘dodgy legal instruments in the wrong jurisdiction that require then determinations in the courts’ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘
    .
    Fascinating,
    l think we agree, the Howard regime should not have created `dodgy` legal instrument `defining` and over-riding `States` birth, death and marriage powers.
    .
    Good to see your breaking free of the teabag-lunacy.

  79. November 3, 2013 4:43 pm

    Reb
    I love arguing about almost any topic so I welcome being challenged.
    Cabbages
    it was determined well before Howard that the power over marriages rests with the commonwealth other than the states .

  80. November 3, 2013 4:48 pm

    Got the URL of the Commonwealth/Federal register of birth, death, marriage.?

  81. November 3, 2013 6:20 pm

    You do realize that if there was one, it would contain .gov.au in it`s url.?

  82. November 3, 2013 6:27 pm

    What is your point Cabbages? I just googled what you asked me and gave you the top result. but now that I think about it I think that state governments keep such records and issue things like wedding, birth or death certificates even though they do so under federal law.

  83. November 3, 2013 6:36 pm

    Still dodging this l see.
    .
    Teabags are NOT making the case on the financial side, why so much money should go up in smoke to oppose these topics.

  84. TB Queensland permalink
    November 3, 2013 7:00 pm

    You do understand that in our system of federal government that there are issues that are raised by state or territory legislation that exceed their remit under the constitution. Brandis is challenging the acts you mention on that basis and it will be up to the courts to decide the matter.how else should such questions of jurisdiction over marriage be decided?

    You obviously don’t understand … if states didn’t have jurisdiction then it wouldn’t/couldn’t be law in the states or territories … and it obviously IS …

    It was “decided” (decades ago) … Brandis is a Fuckwit™ and always has been always will be – another fkn amatuer AG … and out of his depth again …

    … a national approach would guarantee consistency … (Federal legislation on the same “issue” will over-ride state legislatrion …

    http://www.naa.gov.au/collection/fact-sheets/fs89.aspx

  85. TB Queensland permalink
    November 3, 2013 7:03 pm

  86. November 3, 2013 7:07 pm

    Agree TB,
    my main point is `anything` that has been placed in the Federal `jurisdiction` is done-so at the pleasure of, and agreement by the Colony/State, NOT `demanded` by the Feds. The only powers the Feds have is the powers given to it by the States/Colony`s.

  87. TB Queensland permalink
    November 3, 2013 7:15 pm

    777 which causes us ordianry folks untold costs and heartache … we really are a bunch of states and a couple of territories just cobbled together to bicker … I’d really love to live in a country!

  88. November 3, 2013 7:31 pm

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘just cobbled together to bicker’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    .
    `bicker`, it`s a bit like poverty, it`s chosen,
    the east-coast mainland states are basket-cases, choosing to `politic` issues to the detriment of state/nation

  89. November 3, 2013 7:47 pm

    Cheers Cabbages

    Still dodging this l see.
    .
    Teabags are NOT making the case on the financial side, why so much money should go up in smoke to oppose these topics.

    No I think that your statement is just stupid because if the government thinks that a court challenge is necessary to clarify a point of conflict with the states or territories then they have to bring the case. As I said earlier how else are such questions to be resolved?
    By pistols at dawn?

    TB Queensland

    You obviously don’t understand … if states didn’t have jurisdiction then it wouldn’t/couldn’t be law in the states or territories … and it obviously IS …

    No TB the legislation from both the ACT and Tasmania was always going to be challenged because there is some ambiguity about the ability of states or territories creating a form of marriage when its a federal responsibility to legislate on such matters. Did you miss the reports about the Canberra town council trying to structure their law to protect it from challenge?

    It was “decided” (decades ago) … Brandis is a Fuckwit™ and always has been always will be – another fkn amatuer AG … and out of his depth again …

    … a national approach would guarantee consistency … (Federal legislation on the same “issue” will over-ride state legislatrion …

    I agree that federal law trumps state or territory law and challenging the act and Tasmanian statutes is precisely to prove that point.

    Cheers Cabbages

    Agree TB,
    my main point is `anything` that has been placed in the Federal `jurisdiction` is done-so at the pleasure of, and agreement by the Colony/State, NOT `demanded` by the Feds. The only powers the Feds have is the powers given to it by the States/Colony`s.

    You are close but do not quite earn a cigar Cabbages, because once the states cede responsibility to the Feds they can not subsequently just take it back when it would suit them. The states ceded the marriage laws to the Feds and they now have to get on with the fact that they can’t have it back.

  90. TB Queensland permalink
    November 3, 2013 7:57 pm

    I agree that federal law trumps state or territory law and challenging the act and Tasmanian statutes is precisely to prove that point.

    NO its not! Brandis will lose its a gambit (an ignorant one on his part). A Federal law has to be passed through parliament! Courts don’t make law governments do …

    Show me evidence of, “The states ceded the marriage laws to the Feds ” … Tas and ACT just passed LAWS … that are legally binding … marriage has never been a Federal jurisdiction …

  91. TB Queensland permalink
    November 3, 2013 7:57 pm

    IH, did you even look at my link? It seems not …

  92. November 3, 2013 8:05 pm

    TB
    from my link above:

    The federal Marriage Act 1961 and section 109 of the Constitution provides the Commonwealth with exclusive jurisdiction over the formation of marriages in Australia. The states/territories however maintain discrete marriage registers.

    Marriage registers in Australia typically feature –

    name of each person
    gender
    age
    previous marital status
    date and place of marriage
    identity of marriage registrant

    Religious and civil ceremonies are recognised, subject to provision of a a registration certificate with the above information and copliance with requirements such as identification of those being married (eg showing the proposed celebrant documentary proof that they are 18 years old or older) and proof that an individual is free to remarry if that person has been married before.

    Some jurisdictions have recognised relationships outside marriage.

    The Tasmanian Relationships Act 2003 for example provides for recognition and registration of significant relationships (eg two adults who “are not related by family”) and caring (“between two adults, whether or not related by family, one of whom provides the other with domestic support and personal care”).

    The ACT Civil Unions Act 2006 sought to create a statutory scheme for the recognition of gay and other relationships (“A civil union is different to a marriage but is to be treated for all purposes under territory law in the same way as a marriage”). It was overturned by the federal government under s35 of the Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act, reflecting the Territories power in the Constitution.

  93. November 3, 2013 8:13 pm

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘because once the states cede responsibility to the Feds’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    .
    total nonsense,
    no state would `cede` it`s right to `anything` to the Feds, but `retain` the obligation and cost of maintaining registry archives, buildings and workforce

  94. November 3, 2013 8:15 pm

    well you can’t argue with the history Cabbages because the have done precisely that 😉

  95. November 3, 2013 8:20 pm

    lain, your link looks like a hoax-site, TB`s is a Govt link (.gov.au)
    http://www.naa.gov.au/collection/fact-sheets/fs89.aspx
    which says,
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ The registration of births, deaths and marriages in Australia was initially the responsibility of the colonies and later, the states and territories. Inquiries about births, deaths and marriages within Australia should, in most cases, be directed to the registrar in the state or territory in which the event took place.’ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘
    .
    nothing to do with Feds

  96. November 3, 2013 8:56 pm

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘Brandis will lose its a gambit (an ignorant one on his part). A Federal law has to be passed through parliament! Courts don’t make law governments do’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    .
    and Federal Govt can`t just decide it wants to dictate marriage Laws, when they are the States topic,
    .
    which gets me back to the teabag-idiocy of throwing cash on the bonfire

  97. paul permalink
    November 3, 2013 10:38 pm

    This exercise on arguing Hall on marriage equality is heading the same way as it did 3 1/2 years ago, hall derailing the topic to suit his own agenda.

    As hardly no one ever visits his site now, he hogs other sites to try and prove his point, that is not working.

    Hall is just being a troll.

    Here is the link to the other argument on marriage equality.

    http://blogs.crikey.com.au/purepoison/2010/07/21/bill-muehlenbergs-evidence-free-guide-to-gay-marriage/

  98. November 4, 2013 7:44 am

    We can always tell when You are losing the argument Paul, its when you start trying to post links to something from my back catalogue the Crikey thread must be right at the top of your “favourites” in your bookmarks list because that is twice you have cited it in the last week by my reckoning.

    Maate…. Lift yer game!

    You have to do better than call me names and point out that, Quel surprise! my argument now is consistent with one that I made before to win the argument. Frankly having a consistent argument on an issue(for either side is a virtue) in my book.
    Now care to address my response of November 3, 2013 3:35 pm ?

    You know its the one above where I demolish your child like claim that what I said elsewhere (learn to properly attribute you citations! ) proves “bigotry and racism”.

    I don’t know why you have such a man crush on me, I don’t swing that way, and if that is you in your new avatar you are a most unattractive man both physically and intellectually, you are so terribly insecure, lacking in any sort of ability in debate where you always resort to personal abuse to cover you general ignorance.
    Finally remember that it was not I that derailed the thread here it was Cabbages and you,

  99. November 4, 2013 8:17 am

    “my argument now is consistent with one that I made before to win the argument. ”

    ROFLMAO!

    What makes you think you “won” the argument??!!

    All you did was simply repeat your mind-numbingly ignorant declarations of bigotry and homophobia..

    In case you hadn’t noticed, not one person here has come around to your “way of thinking.”

    All you have achieved, if you can call it “an achievement,” is to confirm the widely-held view that you are simply a bigot, a racist and a homophobe..

    Maybe you should return to your own blog, as I’m beginning to reach the conclusion that your use-by date is rapidly approaching on this one.

  100. November 4, 2013 8:22 am

    “you are a most unattractive man both physically and intellectually….”

    “you always resort to personal abuse to cover you general ignorance.”

    In Psychology that’s called “projection”.

  101. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    November 4, 2013 9:36 am

    As I’ve said in the past – having a preference for inclusion rather than discrimination isn’t really a debate. It’s an exchange that reflects the social orientation of people.

    Do they prefer institutions that promote social cohesion and participation or do they prefer to continue to marginalise and ostracise specific groups and demographics.

    It is bizarre that people continue to advocate exclusivity about participation in our traditional institutions, such as marriage.
    =========
    I’m not really in favour of blogging exclusivity either.

  102. TB Queensland permalink
    November 4, 2013 9:55 am

    I tend to agree, ToM …

    … but gee its exciting to watch, sreb, get pissed off and make threats he can keep … 😉

  103. November 4, 2013 10:16 am

    “I’m not really in favour of blogging exclusivity either.”

    Neither am I ToM, but sometimes when I drop by here and read some of Hall’s so called “comments,” I find myself just wandering off to do something else.

    I guess he offers some sort of “entertainment value” in much the same was as scientologists or the westboro baptist church do today…

    I did have a laff when he accused someone else’s avatar of looking ugly…. 😆

    He’s like a walking embodiment of irony.

  104. egg permalink
    November 4, 2013 10:16 am

    I also got a chance to practice ‘insults’, which is the theme of the month.

  105. November 4, 2013 10:22 am

    Reb
    I’m sorry that I have upset you, it was never my intention, in fact I will happily leave the views of others here about Gay marriage unchallenged in the future.
    Cheers

  106. TB Queensland permalink
    November 4, 2013 10:32 am

    I’m sorry that I have upset you

    😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆

    yes, egg, pissant is pretty rough for you and I thought so at the time …

    Actually, IH, posts long-winded style, a bit like, Farnham Bear … oh, how we giggled … and guffawed … its often referred to as “fogging” … write as many words as possible to “fog” the real or perceived argument, issue or point …

    Then of course when your found to be wrong … there’s “fudging” or “waffling” … simply followed by much amusement had by ‘all .. (excuse the pun … 😉 )

  107. TB Queensland permalink
    November 4, 2013 10:33 am

    you’re – aplogies to sreb, IPA and N5 (if he’s lurking)

  108. November 4, 2013 10:36 am

    You haven’t upset me in the slightest.

    All I am saying is that:

    1. You made some declaration that you had “won the argument” on gay marriage when no such thing had occurred (except in your own mind perhaps).

    2. You accuse others of resorting to personal abuse, when you feel they are “losing the argument,” yet you frequently resort to same.

    3. The irony of point 2 above is lost on you.

    You seem to enjoy goading and ridiculing people as some sort of pass time, and dress this up as some form of pretence that you are engaging in “rational debate.”

    While that might be some fanciful dance you’ve created in your own mind, back in the real world your “debating style” (for want of a better term) simply amounts to re-stating your narrow-minded bigoted opinions ad nauseum, despite the fact that your so-called opinions have been shot down in flames for the conservative antiquated views of the 1950’s that they are.

    To assert that your “debating style” represents some sort of “compelling argument” that you have apparently already “won,” is not just fanciful in the extreme, but simply reinforces the fact that you live in sort of delusional state of grandiose self-importance.

    Your mind must be an amazing place. 😯

    As for suggesting that you have “upset” me. Please be reassured that you have as much significance in my life as say, an angry raisin.

  109. paul permalink
    November 4, 2013 10:47 am

    There end the lesson

  110. TB Queensland permalink
    November 4, 2013 11:39 am

    Please be reassured that you have as much significance in my life as say, an angry raisin.

    I just luv it when your on fire, sreb! 😈

    Or, dare I suggest,* a pissant … oh, lordy, lordy, how we chuckled and giggled … 😛

    *and ,egg, of course … 😉

  111. paul permalink
    November 4, 2013 12:01 pm

    Hall, I do not have to do anything, you have just proved how big of a piss-ant you are, you have proved that you are a racist and a bigot just by reinforcing your own comments.

    And I refer to your past comment on other sites just to prove that you have not even listened to what other people say and to prove that you have not changed, always attacking the person, not the subject.

  112. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    November 4, 2013 3:07 pm

    An angry raisin! That’s funny!

  113. egg permalink
    November 4, 2013 3:16 pm

    ‘yes, egg, pissant is pretty rough for you and I thought so at the time …’

    It was uncharacteristic but I said it without malice.

  114. TB Queensland permalink
    November 4, 2013 3:24 pm

    LOL!

  115. egg permalink
    November 4, 2013 3:27 pm

    And I’m doubly amused when I think it was only a Freudian slip, something to do with projection.

  116. paul permalink
    November 4, 2013 4:05 pm

    Here is an article about the disappearance of the Abbott government from Mungo MacCallum,
    Where has the coalition gone. How very true.

    Our political ignorance won’t stay blissful forever

    From climate change to asylum seekers, animal welfare to trade agreements, the Abbott Government thinks that what we don’t know can’t hurt us. The problem is, this just delays the pain, writes Mungo MacCallum.

    It is now clear that the underlying principle of the Abbott Government is to be ignorance: not only are the masses to be kept as far as possible in the dark, but the Government itself does not want to know.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-04/maccallum-our-ignorance-wont-stay-blissful-forever/5067688

  117. November 4, 2013 4:06 pm

    Yeah, l unintentionally derailed the post, sorry reb.
    https://theguttertrash.com/2013/10/31/live-exports-the-next-great-issue-to-disappear-under-abbotts-government/#comment-36768
    (l dropped what l thought was an amusing *guffaw* that l find from time to time)

  118. November 4, 2013 4:17 pm

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘The Treasury’s Blue Book, the manual prepared for the incoming government, has, for the first time, been suppressed; if we knew what the ministers had been told, we would also know when they did perverse and stupid things about it, and this would undermine confidence, which would never do. Far better that we imagine that they do perverse and stupid things because they simply don’t know any better.’ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-04/maccallum-our-ignorance-wont-stay-blissful-forever/5067688

    Yet another `trade-deal` which we will collectively lose on.

    l normally don`t enjoy mungo, but this was quite good.

  119. egg permalink
    November 4, 2013 4:22 pm

    ‘Having already ended funding for the Climate Commission headed by Tim Flannery in what was a blatant but unsuccessful attempt to kill the messenger’, said Mungo.

    Abbott told them they can preach any nonsense they like, just not at government expense.

    ‘Where has the coalition gone. How very true.’

    They are all working hard before parliament begins and I suspect the ministers are on notice to perform or risk being dumped after Xmas.

  120. paul permalink
    November 4, 2013 4:26 pm

    How will we know if the ministers are going to perform or not perform, the government will not tell us, we will be left in the dark, taken back to the dark ages under this government.

  121. TB Queensland permalink
    November 4, 2013 4:39 pm

    In the next Parliament I believe the new title for PM will be put forward as … Der Führer … Tony Abbott is currently practising his speeches …

  122. paul permalink
    November 4, 2013 4:44 pm

    umm… aahhhh…buuuutttt…..oohhhh……..

    or how many three word slogans he can think of???????

  123. November 4, 2013 4:49 pm

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘How will we know if the ministers are going to perform or not perform,’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    they`re politicians, they`ll be shit-house
    .
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘the government will not tell us,’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    yeah, well that`s standard form
    .
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘we will be left in the dark,’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    they will try to keep the public in the dark
    .
    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘taken back to the dark ages under this government.’ ‘ ‘ ‘
    well, 1930`s anyway,
    .
    l don`t share this type of paranoia Paul,
    this is one Fed Govt that is highly predictable,
    .
    this is so-very largely howards re-heated zombies,
    there will be very-little-to-no difference in this Govt and the 1996-2007 Govt.
    .
    1-Same forms of austerity for the lower classes,
    2-same forms of gifting to the wealthy,
    3-Surplus Fetish
    .
    lt will be crap, but not a surprise.

  124. TB Queensland permalink
    November 4, 2013 4:58 pm

    And to complete the tri-fecta (it is Melbourne Cup Eve after all*), 007 … fawning to the church/christian lobby and any Robber Baron who may feel threatened with paying personal tax …

    *the one day that Melbourne comes alive … by dusk they’re all pissed out of their brains and the place becomes the Land of The Undead again …

    … so tomorrow we get re-run after fkn re-run of a horse horse horse horse horse race race race race race … for 24 hours … 😯

  125. November 4, 2013 5:05 pm

    “by dusk they’re all pissed out of their brains and the place becomes the Land of The Undead again …”

    Yeah exactly. It’s the one day of the year when Melbournians contemplate what eternity is like in Queensland.

  126. November 4, 2013 5:09 pm

    Speaking of 007, we’re avoiding the Melbourne Cup altogether tomorrow and going to see the James Bond Exhibition* tomorrow.

    http://designing007melbourne.com

    *For the benefit of Queenlanders, an “exhibition” is a display, demonstration or performance of arts and culture.

  127. egg permalink
    November 4, 2013 5:10 pm

    ‘we will be left in the dark, taken back to the dark ages under this government.’

    Its a disciplined team, doing the job we pay them for, in lockdown until parliament resumes.

  128. November 4, 2013 5:15 pm

    Keep telling yourself that. Eventually the dam will burst and it will be too widespread to obscure.

  129. November 4, 2013 5:24 pm

    It’s hard to know whether egg’s taking the piss or not, but I’m leaning towards the former..

  130. November 4, 2013 5:34 pm

    So you`re questioning egg`s level of delusion.?
    .
    hint, https://theguttertrash.com/co2-and-you-iv/

  131. TB Queensland permalink
    November 4, 2013 5:40 pm

    *For the benefit of Queenlanders, an “exhibition” is a display, demonstration or performance of arts and culture.

    I know that … like the one at the Brisbane Airport I showed you … I bet the James Bond “exhibition” isn’t interactive tho’ …

    http://www.airport-world.com/home/general-news/item/3223-brisbane-airport-to-host-4-day-contemporary-art-festival

    The Gold coast has just “won” the Commonwealth Games and the torch will be relayed to most major cities and towns … we did laugh when they said … but Brisbane will miss out … hilararious, they miss the capital of Queensland just down the road from the GC — thank dog for that …

    … I hear they were going introduce Harley Davidson races … but all the contestants left town … 😉

  132. egg permalink
    November 4, 2013 5:44 pm

    ‘So you`re questioning egg`s level of delusion.?’

    Leftoids are funny pantz wetters.

  133. TB Queensland permalink
    November 4, 2013 5:49 pm

    I guess that settle’s it egg really is in love with Tones … 🙄

  134. November 4, 2013 6:25 pm

    ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘really is in love with Tones’ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘
    .
    Of course he does, just like lain he is a devout member of the teabag-church.
    .
    ln the 1960`s a young Karl Rove developed his interest in demographics and conservative politics, and he ended up developing the initial talk-points that the Repugs used to entice christians to vote, as they `usually` didn`t.
    .
    Rove convinced the Repug`s to use his idea`s, they had chosen the Reagan puppet to learn the lines, most of us understand as Repug talk-points today. The `essence` of this tactic was to have the corporations benefit by collecting the backing of christian churches and convincing their congregation to vote. This is not `new` information nor `hidden` information, as most here would know.
    .
    What most don`t realize today is the corporations don`t control the Repugs, but the Teabags do. Fundy christians that follow the armagedon, judgement-day, rapture, end of world stuff are running the show. The fundamentals have decided to hasten their religious delusion of destruction by backing the most damaging and destructive corporate and Govt activities they can find, and they assist by keeping the moderate christians quiet.

  135. egg permalink
    November 4, 2013 6:30 pm

    Its true, I’m now intrenched in the dark side. Ironically they are an optimistic lot and don’t believe the end of the world is nigh because of human frailty.

  136. November 4, 2013 6:43 pm

    sbs-news just did a `tobacco` report,
    .
    it was the identical report uncle TB received from me about 3-months ago,
    `yay sbs breaking`

  137. TB Queensland permalink
    November 4, 2013 7:04 pm

    😯 I did? I don’t rememeber … but I beleeeeve …

  138. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    November 4, 2013 7:18 pm

    The Melbourne Cup is a cultural e event not to be missed. It has everything for the sports lover.

  139. TB Queensland permalink
    November 4, 2013 7:43 pm

    The Melbourne Cup is a cultural e event not to be missed. It has everything for the piss lover.

    Is an “e event” something that is constantly repeated ad nauseum? 😉

  140. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    November 4, 2013 7:46 pm

    e

    The Cup is HUGE, and it is completely unnecessary to even watch any horses!

  141. Neil of Sydney permalink
    November 4, 2013 9:09 pm

    Just been listening to 2GB and apparently there are not as many politicians at the Cup this year.

  142. TB Queensland permalink
    November 5, 2013 10:12 am

    … it is completely unnecessary to even watch any horses!

    oh, how I try not to! 😉

    ====================================

    Just been listening to 2GB and apparently there are not as many politicians at the Cup this year.

    Well, if yer not there ya can’t answer tricky questions now, can ya … 😉

  143. March 31, 2014 8:53 pm

    Hello there! This article couldn’t be written any better!
    Reading through this post reminds me of my previous roommate!

    He always kept talking about this. I will send this post to him.
    Fairly certain he’s going to have a very good read. Thanks
    for sharing!

  144. TB Queensland permalink
    March 31, 2014 9:01 pm

    Duh! 😯

  145. April 23, 2014 6:35 pm

    Thanks for your valuable post. Through the years, I have come to be able to understand that the particular symptoms of mesothelioma are caused by this build up associated fluid between lining on the lung and
    the breasts cavity. The condition may start within the chest region and spread to other
    limbs. Other symptoms of pleural mesothelioma cancer include weight-loss, severe deep breathing trouble, fever, difficulty
    eating, and bloating of the face and neck areas. It ought
    to be noted that some people with the disease will not experience virtually any serious indicators at all.

  146. April 23, 2014 6:41 pm

    Hey, isn`t `seotex us` a hardcore guy on guy porn site based in Texas.?

  147. egg permalink
    May 4, 2014 12:11 pm

    I agree, its truly unique.

Go on say something, you'll feel better...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: