Go Back   IceInSpace > General Astronomy > General Chat

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #41  
Old 08-12-2017, 11:26 PM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 16,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by csb View Post
What Alex?! Normal people can't use marriage as a tax dodge so how can gay people
I am thinking about the companies who turnover billions and yet pay little tax.
A coal company turning over 30 billion and paying $60 million tax...it is a scandal more so because public attention is diverted to stuff that really a should have been managed with less fuss.
Alex
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 09-12-2017, 02:07 AM
Visionary's Avatar
Visionary (David)
Registered User

Visionary is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Sydney
Posts: 355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Haese View Post
I voted yes for several reasons but mainly for one of my sisters. I hope she can return to Australia with her partner and their child to live permanently rather than being forced to live in the US because Australia did not have same sex marriage and they could not get a resident visa for her partner. This I see as a great implication and only just. I don't see all the BS about the repercussions of the legislation changing. Does it really affect anyone if people get married? No. Anyway I am glad the legislation passed.
Paul, please excuse my ignorance, my question is genuine. Surely the provisions and legal protections afforded by De facto marriage would have provided the necessary legal protections to secure a resident Visa? I would have thought to deny a Visa to a couple protected that enjoyed a Defacto status would be impossible irrespective of sexual status.
Paul, I had no idea that the Marriage Act was relevant re: Visa etc: I thought all of the discrimination between Defacto status and Married status had been swept away in the 1970's
If the passage of the Act has helped your Sister then that a good thing. Cheers
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 09-12-2017, 06:35 AM
JA
.....

JA is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by xelasnave View Post
I am thinking about the companies who turnover billions and yet pay little tax.
A coal company turning over 30 billion and paying $60 million tax...it is a scandal more so because public attention is diverted to stuff that really a should have been managed with less fuss.
Alex
That is so true Alex. We should focus just as much investigative and legislative attention on the tax paid by corporations and delve deeply in to matters, corporations and individuals exposed in such investigations as the Paradise Papers and Panama Papers as legal as these arrangements may or may not be.

Best
JA
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 09-12-2017, 07:34 AM
LewisM's Avatar
LewisM
Novichok test rabbit

LewisM is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere in the cosmos...
Posts: 10,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Haese View Post
I voted yes for several reasons but mainly for one of my sisters. I hope she can return to Australia with her partner and their child to live permanently rather than being forced to live in the US because Australia did not have same sex marriage and they could not get a resident visa for her partner. This I see as a great implication and only just. I don't see all the BS about the repercussions of the legislation changing. Does it really affect anyone if people get married? No. Anyway I am glad the legislation passed.
https://www.border.gov.au/Trav/Visa-1/801-

The partner visa has been around for MANY years (since 1997 I believe) and covers defacto (includes same sex relationships). (https://www.border.gov.au/Visas/supp...onship-is.aspx)

https://www.border.gov.au/about/corp...35relationship

My wife got a Partner visa 12 years ago (it was much cheaper then), and the forms did specify defacto and same sex as an option. We did it all ourselves (not even remotely daunting or difficult), and the total time from applying for the partner visa and then to her being granted temporary resident was 6 months.

Last edited by LewisM; 09-12-2017 at 09:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 09-12-2017, 09:51 AM
csb's Avatar
csb (Craig)
Registered User

csb is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Adelaide, Sth Australia
Posts: 909
Jenchris, I noticed my mistake after posting. Actually I did edit before you posted. Sorry, just a slip of the wrist
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 09-12-2017, 10:00 AM
LewisM's Avatar
LewisM
Novichok test rabbit

LewisM is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere in the cosmos...
Posts: 10,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by csb View Post
Jenchris, I noticed my mistake after posting. Actually I did edit before you posted. Sorry, just a slip of the wrist
Damn, a limp wrist?

You need to strengthen that up lad.

Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 09-12-2017, 11:26 AM
jenchris's Avatar
jenchris (Jennifer)
Registered User

jenchris is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ormeau Gold Coast
Posts: 2,067
Craig my petal.
It's the comparison of Gay and normal - GAY IS NORMAL.
It's just a variation that is part of life's rich tapestry.
Ask my wife.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 09-12-2017, 11:48 AM
taminga16's Avatar
taminga16 (Greg)
Registered User

taminga16 is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maldon. VIC
Posts: 855
Quote:
Originally Posted by csb View Post
Something worse: the amendments to the Marriage Act that were made yesterday
Short memory Mate. Marriage Amendment Act 2004. ... On 27 May 2004 the then federal Attorney-General Philip Ruddock introduced the Marriage Amendment Bill 2004 to incorporate a definition of marriage into the Marriage Act 1961 and to outlaw the recognition of same-sex marriages lawfully entered into, all under the guidance of John Howard.
And while I have your attention, could you please explain to the group how the bill is going to impact on your television viewing?
Respectfully, Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 09-12-2017, 12:21 PM
LewisM's Avatar
LewisM
Novichok test rabbit

LewisM is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere in the cosmos...
Posts: 10,388
C'mon people, no need to attack Craig over his beliefs - he is entitled to his point of view as much as anyone else.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 09-12-2017, 12:24 PM
csb's Avatar
csb (Craig)
Registered User

csb is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Adelaide, Sth Australia
Posts: 909
TV will become gayer
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 09-12-2017, 12:41 PM
csb's Avatar
csb (Craig)
Registered User

csb is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Adelaide, Sth Australia
Posts: 909
Thanks Lewis but I don't feel I'm being attacked.

Actually my posts are some cheeky banter.

I didn't vote because I considered it a waste of effort. The world is becoming more and more strange and the law/legislation is being used to push this change. More is certainly to come.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 09-12-2017, 12:48 PM
Camelopardalis's Avatar
Camelopardalis (Dunk)
Drifting from the pole

Camelopardalis is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by csb View Post
I didn't vote because I considered it a waste of effort. The world is becoming more and more strange and the law/legislation is being used to push this change. More is certainly to come.
Last time I checked, about 80% of eligible voters in Australia registered their choice...if you didn't register your opinion, then more fool you...

In the civilised world, we call that democracy in action. You don't have to agree with it, but if you don't participate, you're not in a position of strength to throw rocks at the process.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 09-12-2017, 01:17 PM
csb's Avatar
csb (Craig)
Registered User

csb is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Adelaide, Sth Australia
Posts: 909
Ok better wording would be abstained. I abstained as did some government ministers. They also participate in the legislation and quite probably the marriage act.

They had their reasons and I told you my reasons.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 09-12-2017, 02:23 PM
MortonH's Avatar
MortonH
Deprived of starlight

MortonH is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 3,762
Quote:
Originally Posted by csb View Post
Thanks Lewis but I don't feel I'm being attacked.

Actually my posts are some cheeky banter.

I didn't vote because I considered it a waste of effort. The world is becoming more and more strange and the law/legislation is being used to push this change. More is certainly to come.

I don't see how this will change the world, TV or anything else. It was flagrant discrimination to exclude same-sex couples from the Marriage Act in 2004. What we've done now is not so much granting a right to a minority but ending discrimination against that minority.

Frankly the whole thing was a no brainer. The fact that we had to go through the postal vote first just made Australia look stupid.

What I'm more concerned about is that many people's objections were based on their religious beliefs. I don't want to be governed based on the beliefs of someone like Tony Abbott. I want to be governed based on a fair, equitable system of law.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 09-12-2017, 02:42 PM
strongmanmike's Avatar
strongmanmike (Michael)
Highest Observatory in Oz

strongmanmike is offline
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 17,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike View Post
This a momentous day in Australian history and to all those IIS'ers who have been waiting for this day.. sheesh! better late than never, huh? ...heart felt thoughts to you and your loving partners ..now go get married!

Regardless of the difficult, contentious and in many ways unnecessary, dog in a manger, road taken to get to today, t'is a (rare) great day in our democracy

I am, you are, we are Australian!

Mike
See original post above!

Now read it again

Education level and level of intellect correlate very highly with same sex marriage views...fact, not fiction

Now...read orginal post again!

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 09-12-2017, 03:02 PM
LewisM's Avatar
LewisM
Novichok test rabbit

LewisM is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere in the cosmos...
Posts: 10,388
Will be interesting to see if certain churches forbid marriage of same sex in their churches. I believe there remains a supposedly inalienable right of the church to deny marriage to whomever they please. I think a same sex couple trying to marry in a Catholic Church would only be trying to make a controversy and a point (despite the juxtaposition of the Catholic Church in the first place...SMH). There may be some very over-blown court cases against churches now (and GOOD too).

I agree with Morton in that I suspect a great number of no vote was based upon archaic, centuries old religious dogma. Time we changed religion to be updated with humanity as well (like that will ever happen )
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 09-12-2017, 03:04 PM
LewisM's Avatar
LewisM
Novichok test rabbit

LewisM is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere in the cosmos...
Posts: 10,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by strongmanmike View Post
See original post above!

Now read it again

Education level and level of intellect correlate very highly with same sex marriage views...fact, not fiction

Now...read orginal post again!

Mike
Stop talking to yourself Mike
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 09-12-2017, 03:05 PM
strongmanmike's Avatar
strongmanmike (Michael)
Highest Observatory in Oz

strongmanmike is offline
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 17,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by LewisM View Post
Stop talking to yourself Mike
Please read original post....
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 09-12-2017, 03:38 PM
Varangian's Avatar
Varangian (John)
Registered User

Varangian is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 599
Omg someone shoot me and put me out of my misery from reading this thread. Yes I shouldn't have but I did.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 09-12-2017, 03:41 PM
Andy01's Avatar
Andy01 (Andy)
My God it's full of stars

Andy01 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by LewisM View Post

I agree with Morton in that I suspect a great number of no vote was based upon archaic, centuries old religious dogma. Time we changed religion to be updated with humanity as well (like that will ever happen )
I don't think it's appropriate for anyone to criticise people's beliefs anymore than it is to say what people can/cannot do in their bedrooms... true believers have a conscience too - let's remember to respect that as well.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 03:24 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Testar
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement