Racism in Australia

Discuss all the events of the day

Moderator: GH Moderators

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 7, 2012, 2:01 pm

T_R wrote:
Green eyed Mick wrote:
T_R wrote:Wow.

Just wow.

And this from the guy who complains that corporate big wigs don't care about people.
So tell me as a champion of the working man are you a strong supporter of the union movement? After all the unions are all about protecting jobs, even if they are in industries that are no longer economically viable.

Do you think that the Government should step in to protect industries that are no longer viable? Or do you think that if a Business is not longer able to survive due to technological changes or changes in consumption habits the business should be allowed to fail in accordance with the natural economic cycle?

Do you support protectionism for sectors who can't compete with foreign Labor? Do you support free trade agreements, even if they put the livlihoods of Farmers at risk? Do you agree that companies like woolworths should be allowed to continue to exert pressure on suppliers and consumers without government interference?

I think government has a role to play I also think business and individuals need to take responsibility for their own actions.
Question wrote:EXPOSED, GREEN DIEHARD!!!!!!!.. given up on society little fella.

I gave up on society long ago. When the biggest health concern in your society is having too much there is seriously something wrong. Yet all most people are concerned about is me, me, me and more, more, more.
You know GEM, I'm not really interested in continuing this discussion. I don't think there's any chance to a meeting of minds, and when you come up with comments like 'as a champion of the working man' it's clear that all you're about is (trying to) score points. I've never claimed to be out there to defend worker rights, I'm in business to make a profit. That does not mean you have to be completely morally bankrupt, however. Most people seem to manage to handle this kind of shade of grey in their life. You seem to struggle with this - I express opinions of economic matters, so you assume that I vote in a certain way and hold certain far-right wing social ideals. I suggest that people can show an element of care about their employees and colleagues in an environment of fiscal responsibility, and I get some tirade about free trade agreements and support of protectionism. How about in future you discuss what I actually say, rather than what you would have liked me to have said?
Back at you :)

Nick
Mal Meninga
Posts: 55313
Joined: January 6, 2005, 7:21 pm
Favourite Player: Jack Wighton
Location: The abyss, ive brought a house in the abyss, im getting mail redirected to the abyss

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Nick » February 7, 2012, 2:51 pm

GEM, you are the personification of the reason the greens are considered the most extremist party in the australia political landscape. You havent put 5 minutes of thought into any of the crap your sprouting, you couldnt have. I mean i dont much care for you but aside from disagreeing with you on just about everything fundimentally discussed on this forum, i dont think your an idiot. So it beyond my logic that a man who appears smart would look at those policies, think about them and still vote for the Greens party for policy reasons.

I get voting for the greens as a protest vote, its stupid and usually done by people who dont have an understanding of what the horrfic and devestating impact of the greens being in charge, and usually done by people who dont care what so ever about politics. But i get it to a degree.

The fact that there are people who vote for these loons on the basis of policy, the fact that there are people who share the extremist sentiments expressed by yourself in this thread, the fact that some of those people are in positions where they can attempt (though they fail) to influence policy of this country, is absolutely terrifying.
Image
Image
Raiders member no: 4008
Bay 28, Row JJ, Seat 8

greeneyed wrote:Sheens was brought in to build the Cowboys and Tigers. He did both, bringing one a premiership, despite the many injury ridden years of his key playmaker.
^^^
:lol: !

User avatar
dubby
Don Furner
Posts: 30393
Joined: May 16, 2006, 12:14 pm
Favourite Player: Mal Meninga
Location: Western Sydney

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by dubby » February 7, 2012, 2:55 pm

But Nick....the planet is sick!! :lol:
Image

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 7, 2012, 3:16 pm

I vote Green because my social conscience won't allow me to vote for anyone else. The Greens IR policies contain some 53 key points many of which I agree with some I don't. The Greens also have policies on drugs that I don't agree with and polices on education and trade I don't agree with.

IMO most people don't support every policy of the party they vote for. Instead they either pick the party whose ideology they most identify with or they identify certain policies that are of great importance to them and vote accordingly.

Like I said I vote Green because they are the only party that has a humane asylum seeker policy. The only party who are committed to full and equal rights for all Australians and they are the Only Party who acknowledge the need for real action on climate change.
dubby wrote:But Nick....the planet is sick!! :lol:
The planet is sick but don't worry your imaginary friend will save you and send people like me to hell hey Dubs? :roflmao

gergreg
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6921
Joined: June 24, 2008, 4:22 pm

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by gergreg » February 7, 2012, 5:33 pm

Whilst politics and racism are issues that crossover this is not the thread to push your political agendas. Up until the derail this discussion was going along quite well.
Shoving it in your face since 2017

User avatar
Albi
David Furner
Posts: 3785
Joined: June 6, 2005, 11:26 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
Location: Bundaberg, QLD

Racism in Australia

Post by Albi » February 7, 2012, 10:55 pm

I think GEM and I may be the only Greens on here.. My reasons for voting Greens are similar to his, being my conscious doesn't allow me to vote elsewhere.. No other political party in this country is interested in policies that adequately deal with major issues such as the environment, asylum seekers and mental health to name 3.

I take Gerg's point that this isn't the right forum for such commentary, however dealing with systemic racism is also a platform the Greens deal with..

I'm always interested in alternate views, regardless of how diametrically opposed they may be to mine especially; T_R is an example..
Canberra Raiders Bronze Member

Image
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15735
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by T_R » February 7, 2012, 11:51 pm

Albi, I don't think my views are diametrically opposed to yours at all. I am very sympathetic to your view point on almost ever social issue you comment on.

I disagree, however, that the watermelon party is the right medium for achieving what you are looking for.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.

User avatar
Albi
David Furner
Posts: 3785
Joined: June 6, 2005, 11:26 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
Location: Bundaberg, QLD

Racism in Australia

Post by Albi » February 8, 2012, 7:15 am

T_R wrote:Albi, I don't think my views are diametrically opposed to yours at all. I am very sympathetic to your view point on almost ever social issue you comment on.

I disagree, however, that the watermelon party is the right medium for achieving what you are looking for.
Agreed, we've far more in common than not..

With the utter collapse of the flaccid, ineffectual and completely incompetent 'Labor left', I see no other voting options for people like myself.
Canberra Raiders Bronze Member

Image
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.

User avatar
Manbush
Mal Meninga
Posts: 24597
Joined: March 14, 2008, 6:55 pm
Favourite Player: Luke Turner

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Manbush » February 8, 2012, 7:25 am

Check out the sex party's policies, they have some good ones without being as extreme
Albi wrote: I'm always interested in alternate views, regardless of how diametrically opposed they may be to mine especially
I'm the same mate, be a very boring place if everyone thought the same
"My own opinion is enough for me and I claim the right to have it defended against any consensus, any majority, anywhere, any place, any time, and anyone who disagrees with this can pick a number, get in line and kiss my ass" Christopher Hitchens

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 8, 2012, 7:36 am

manbush wrote:Check out the sex party's policies, they have some good ones without being as extreme
Albi wrote: I'm always interested in alternate views, regardless of how diametrically opposed they may be to mine especially
I'm the same mate, be a very boring place if everyone thought the same
Extreme is a very subjective term and it can be inflammatory. I find Abbotts stance on Asylum seekers extreme and Katter's opinions on homsexuality extreme. Others think Abbott and Katter's opinions are moderate or even a little to the left of their own opinions on certain topics.

The reason I see to vote Green as opposed to the Sex party which I agree has some great social policy initiatives is because the Greens can get elected and they can have some impact. An example would be pushing legislation giving the ACT and NT similar rights to the states to create legislation. Another would be the senate enquiry into the same sex marriage bill. IMO Social issues like these wouldn't move an inch to the left in this country without the Greens.

User avatar
Manbush
Mal Meninga
Posts: 24597
Joined: March 14, 2008, 6:55 pm
Favourite Player: Luke Turner

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Manbush » February 8, 2012, 7:48 am

Extreme is personal, sex party could be considered the same with their opinion on religion

Edit: takin it to politics thread
"My own opinion is enough for me and I claim the right to have it defended against any consensus, any majority, anywhere, any place, any time, and anyone who disagrees with this can pick a number, get in line and kiss my ass" Christopher Hitchens

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15735
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by T_R » February 8, 2012, 8:31 am

Green eyed Mick wrote:
manbush wrote:Check out the sex party's policies, they have some good ones without being as extreme
Albi wrote: I'm always interested in alternate views, regardless of how diametrically opposed they may be to mine especially
I'm the same mate, be a very boring place if everyone thought the same
Extreme is a very subjective term and it can be inflammatory. I find Abbotts stance on Asylum seekers extreme and Katter's opinions on homsexuality extreme. Others think Abbott and Katter's opinions are moderate or even a little to the left of their own opinions on certain topics.

The reason I see to vote Green as opposed to the Sex party which I agree has some great social policy initiatives is because the Greens can get elected and they can have some impact. An example would be pushing legislation giving the ACT and NT similar rights to the states to create legislation. Another would be the senate enquiry into the same sex marriage bill. IMO Social issues like these wouldn't move an inch to the left in this country without the Greens.
You have to make your mind up. You've said previously that you don't mind that the Greens have some absurd policies because 'they will never be in a position to implement them'. Now, you say that you are voting for the Greens because 'they can get elected and have some impact'.

I don't think you are subjecting the Greens to the same kind of scrutiny that you are the other parties.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.

User avatar
dubby
Don Furner
Posts: 30393
Joined: May 16, 2006, 12:14 pm
Favourite Player: Mal Meninga
Location: Western Sydney

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by dubby » February 8, 2012, 8:36 am

I vote entirely on social policy. What is the point of money when the planet is dying?
One world government?

Pro Euthenasia?

pro Abortion?

Oh yeah, great social interests.

And my "imaginary friend" has abundant historical evidence that he existed.

Nice try mate. Don't let your enormous ego get in the way now.
Image

Stuat
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6860
Joined: July 9, 2005, 9:41 am

Racism in Australia

Post by Stuat » February 8, 2012, 9:02 am

The greens are a small party though. They have bugger all power. Yes they deserve some scrutiny but if you think that their economic policies are ever going to get implemented your much mistaken. Their influence is to try and push whoever is in government a little to the left. The inconsistencies in their policy stance have been widely publicized.

It would be nice if the same could be said about the coalition. So far we have lowered pensions, higher business taxes, an NBN policy that won't work because of the horrid state of the CAN (copper) network and will put 15 billion onto the budget plus whatever it costs to build, costings being done by catering companies, "savings" from scrapping a revenue raising tax (MMRT) etc etc. Those policies deserve closer examination because they could actually do a lot of harm to our economy. Far more than the greens could ever hope for. If Abbott is elected hopefully the more sensible heads in the party step in and make him break most of them.

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15735
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by T_R » February 8, 2012, 9:13 am

I don't think you can have it both ways. GEM's argument seems to be that they can't influence us with their wacky policies but can with their 'positive' ones. Frankly, I think that's being a little simple.

I agree with your comments entirely about the coalition. Buggered if I have any answers about who to vote for.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.

User avatar
dubby
Don Furner
Posts: 30393
Joined: May 16, 2006, 12:14 pm
Favourite Player: Mal Meninga
Location: Western Sydney

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by dubby » February 8, 2012, 9:20 am

T_R wrote:I don't think you can have it both ways. GEM's argument seems to be that they can't influence us with their wacky policies but can with their 'positive' ones. Frankly, I think that's being a little simple.

I agree with your comments entirely about the coalition. Buggered if I have any answers about who to vote for.
Vote for Pedro. ;)
Image

Fuifui Bradbrad
Ruben Wiki
Posts: 5757
Joined: May 3, 2008, 10:23 pm
Favourite Player: Denan Kemp
Location: Penrith, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Fuifui Bradbrad » February 8, 2012, 9:25 am

dubby wrote:
T_R wrote:I don't think you can have it both ways. GEM's argument seems to be that they can't influence us with their wacky policies but can with their 'positive' ones. Frankly, I think that's being a little simple.

I agree with your comments entirely about the coalition. Buggered if I have any answers about who to vote for.
Vote for Pedro. ;)
Sorry, don't you mean Vote for Pelo? :P
Feel free to call me RickyRicky StickStick if you like. I will also accept Super Fui, King Brad, Kid Dynamite, Chocolate-Thunda... or Brad.

User avatar
Manbush
Mal Meninga
Posts: 24597
Joined: March 14, 2008, 6:55 pm
Favourite Player: Luke Turner

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Manbush » February 8, 2012, 9:56 am

dubby wrote:
I vote entirely on social policy. What is the point of money when the planet is dying?
One world government?

Pro Euthenasia?

pro Abortion?

Oh yeah, great social interests.

And my "imaginary friend" has abundant historical evidence that he existed.

Nice try mate. Don't let your enormous ego get in the way now.
While I generally don't agree with Mick the points you've raised I would have to, in an ideal world there would be one government best way to gaurantee freedom and equality for all, reduce wars etc, euthenasia can be very beneficial, reduce pain and suffering for all concerned, abortion talk to me after someone dear to you has become pregnant to a rapist.

Lol and don't get me started on "historical evidence" :P
"My own opinion is enough for me and I claim the right to have it defended against any consensus, any majority, anywhere, any place, any time, and anyone who disagrees with this can pick a number, get in line and kiss my ass" Christopher Hitchens

Stuat
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6860
Joined: July 9, 2005, 9:41 am

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Stuat » February 8, 2012, 10:40 am

dubby wrote:
I vote entirely on social policy. What is the point of money when the planet is dying?
One world government?

Pro Euthenasia?

pro Abortion?

Oh yeah, great social interests.

And my "imaginary friend" has abundant historical evidence that he existed.

Nice try mate. Don't let your enormous ego get in the way now.
I'm not a huge greens supporter, but you could have done better than abortion and euthanasia. I don't think anyone takes abortion lightly, but for many women at times in their lives it is the "best" option. Making it illegal doesn't stop abortions, it simply kills more women, who resort to dodgy backyard abortions, rather than a safe, simply medical procedure... The arugment that women go out and have abortions for fun is a huge straw man. It often reads like people think women actually go out and go "I'll have a strong flat white and an abortion to go"...

While there are legal concerns with euthanasia, for many sufferers with chronic illnesses, choosing to end their lives with friends and family, is the option they would choose if it were legal. The big issue is getting the legal safeguards in place so that people aren't murdered because they are a burden to their friends and family. As it stands, euthanasia is "common" in the medical system. If someone is in pain, they can be given more morphine, if they are still in pain they can be given more etc... If that happens to kill them thats fine. Many doctors use this to put patients out of their misery, telling them what they are allowed to do and telling them to keep saying they are in pain, if they want to end it. Again, a poor solution to the problem, without safeguards, where everything happens in a grey area.

Same can be said for drug law reform, where the greens have retreated recently. Drugs kill people. They are also incredibly popular and their popularity hasn't decreased under prohibition. Different drugs go in and out of fashion, but drug use remains high (unintended pun). Because they are illegal, the damage caused is exacerbated. People are reluctant to seek treatment, go to doctors etc. Many many people, go to jail for possession of small quantities (mainly poor people, the middle class get off), the levers that would be there to change user habits don't exist (taxes etc), many people needlessly die either because they don't want to get caught and wait before getting medical treatment for people who are overdosing and because what something is sold as often isn't what it is, meaning people are often taking far more dangerous drugs than they thought they were without their knowledge. Decriminalisation for example would at least take some of the burden off policing non violent petty crimes that hurt no-one freeing up resources to track down violent anti social crime. Lots of good people wouldn't have their future jeopardized by a criminal conviction and peoples lives would be saved because the stigma of getting treatment for overdoses would be reduced. Legalisation would also have lots of societal benefits, firstly it would cut off the majority of funding for organised crime and reduce the violence associated with the drug trade, people would be safer because they would know what they were taking and be taking a known amount. Thats only in first world countries, not even taking into account the benefits for places like Mexico and Columbia whose societies have been ripped apart by the illegal drug trade. The question that needs to be asked though is how much would use spike? Would that outweigh the benefits? From other countries that have gone down this path the answer is no. Use has stayed stable, more people aren't using drugs because its no longer illegal to carry and use small quantities. Combined with better social care and facilities for addicts, drug law reform can improve society. The arguments for such reform are good and more and more former drug enforcement officials and policemen on the front line are coming forward and advocating such reforms.

The problem with these sort of debates is that they are viewed as moral issues, not practical societal ones. Even questioning current drug policy results in "I CANT BELIEVE YOU WANT TO GIVE DRUGS TO KIDS" and complete dismissal of the ideas by many, even if those reforms, on a practical utilitarian sense will result in a safer fairer society for everyone. The same goes for abortion and euthanasia, the debates are not held on what is "best" in a world that is full of grey but on the terms of a black and white moral debate, which will get us nowhere and stops all worthy debate before it even starts. The fact you and others write off such policies without even considering them because they don't fit with your moral world view doesn't make them extreme.

The greens have plenty of whacky policies, I'm not sure why you pick the two you did?

User avatar
Albi
David Furner
Posts: 3785
Joined: June 6, 2005, 11:26 am
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
Location: Bundaberg, QLD

Racism in Australia

Post by Albi » February 8, 2012, 10:51 am

dubby wrote:
I vote entirely on social policy. What is the point of money when the planet is dying?
One world government?

Pro Euthenasia?

pro Abortion?

Oh yeah, great social interests.

And my "imaginary friend" has abundant historical evidence that he existed.

Nice try mate. Don't let your enormous ego get in the way now.
Dubby :o. Surely you know the distinction between bring pro abortion/euthanasia and pro choice?

Of course you do.. You're just creating a strawman to knock down ;)
Canberra Raiders Bronze Member

Image
Banner courtesy of the very talented, fistinz.

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 8, 2012, 10:52 am

T_R wrote:
Green eyed Mick wrote:
manbush wrote:Check out the sex party's policies, they have some good ones without being as extreme
Albi wrote: I'm always interested in alternate views, regardless of how diametrically opposed they may be to mine especially
I'm the same mate, be a very boring place if everyone thought the same
Extreme is a very subjective term and it can be inflammatory. I find Abbotts stance on Asylum seekers extreme and Katter's opinions on homsexuality extreme. Others think Abbott and Katter's opinions are moderate or even a little to the left of their own opinions on certain topics.

The reason I see to vote Green as opposed to the Sex party which I agree has some great social policy initiatives is because the Greens can get elected and they can have some impact. An example would be pushing legislation giving the ACT and NT similar rights to the states to create legislation. Another would be the senate enquiry into the same sex marriage bill. IMO Social issues like these wouldn't move an inch to the left in this country without the Greens.
You have to make your mind up. You've said previously that you don't mind that the Greens have some absurd policies because 'they will never be in a position to implement them'. Now, you say that you are voting for the Greens because 'they can get elected and have some impact'.

I don't think you are subjecting the Greens to the same kind of scrutiny that you are the other parties.
It is very strauight forward TR. Greens will never have enough seats to form government and implement their policies. However because they have elected members in the house and senate they have a seat at the negotiation table. It is how our system works. The Libs joined with the Nats because as individual parties they had no hope of forming government. Their coalition is based on policy compromise. The position I would one day hope to find the Greens in would be similar. A formal or informal coalition where their ideology is able to drag our centre right leaning country back to the left.

IMO the Greens are subjected to far more scrutiny than the Nats and Katters Australia party.

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 8, 2012, 10:55 am

dubby wrote:
I vote entirely on social policy. What is the point of money when the planet is dying?
One world government?

Pro Euthenasia?

pro Abortion?

Oh yeah, great social interests.

And my "imaginary friend" has abundant historical evidence that he existed.

Nice try mate. Don't let your enormous ego get in the way now.
:roflmao could you make it any easier for me :roflmao

User avatar
dubby
Don Furner
Posts: 30393
Joined: May 16, 2006, 12:14 pm
Favourite Player: Mal Meninga
Location: Western Sydney

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by dubby » February 8, 2012, 11:26 am

And people call Christians naive.

Here is one group of people up in arms over treatment to boat people but say hey, its fine to kill a fetus. But lets give that fetus a chance to end its own life when its wants if its not terminated.

Manbush, I love engaging in debate with you on some issues but surely, SURELY you cannot dispute the existence of Jesus, and you don't need a bible to do so.
Image

Stuat
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6860
Joined: July 9, 2005, 9:41 am

Racism in Australia

Post by Stuat » February 8, 2012, 11:34 am

But abortions and euthanasia happen even when they are illegal! While the number of abortions done when it was illegal is hard to determine, it was illegal so nobody was collecting stats, more women died having them (which was possible to investigate). The world is not black and white. Banning abortion means more women will die, more kids will be born into circumstances that aren't ideal etc. There is no "best" option that doesn't have drawbacks in the real world. If you are willing to "kill" women to save a few lumps of cells, that's your choice, but personally, I don't think that is the best solution to the problem. I would prefer abortion to be a choice and for available abortions to be safe to protect the lives of living adult women.

User avatar
Manbush
Mal Meninga
Posts: 24597
Joined: March 14, 2008, 6:55 pm
Favourite Player: Luke Turner

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Manbush » February 8, 2012, 12:30 pm

dubby wrote:And people call Christians naive.

Here is one group of people up in arms over treatment to boat people but say hey, its fine to kill a fetus. But lets give that fetus a chance to end its own life when its wants if its not terminated.

Manbush, I love engaging in debate with you on some issues but surely, SURELY you cannot dispute the existence of Jesus, and you don't need a bible to do so.

Ive met a few guys called Jesus, historically there's also many Peter Parker's doesn't mean they can swing from buildings on webbing shot from their wrists
"My own opinion is enough for me and I claim the right to have it defended against any consensus, any majority, anywhere, any place, any time, and anyone who disagrees with this can pick a number, get in line and kiss my ass" Christopher Hitchens

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » February 8, 2012, 1:33 pm

manbush wrote:
dubby wrote:And people call Christians naive.

Here is one group of people up in arms over treatment to boat people but say hey, its fine to kill a fetus. But lets give that fetus a chance to end its own life when its wants if its not terminated.

Manbush, I love engaging in debate with you on some issues but surely, SURELY you cannot dispute the existence of Jesus, and you don't need a bible to do so.

Ive met a few guys called Jesus, historically there's also many Peter Parker's doesn't mean they can swing from buildings on webbing shot from their wrists
:thumbsup love it MB

A fetus is a person in the same way 40,000,000 sperm in a soggy kleenex is a person

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » August 7, 2012, 1:01 am


Michael
Mal Meninga
Posts: 29295
Joined: May 2, 2007, 3:44 pm
Location: Clovelly

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Michael » August 7, 2012, 8:41 am

People don't seem to understand that the concept of 'free speech' is not about some unfettered right to say whatever you want to whoever you want with any ramifications.
Image

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15735
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by T_R » August 7, 2012, 11:35 am

Michael wrote:People don't seem to understand that the concept of 'free speech' is not about some unfettered right to say whatever you want to whoever you want with any ramifications.
What is it then, Michael?
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.

Michael
Mal Meninga
Posts: 29295
Joined: May 2, 2007, 3:44 pm
Location: Clovelly

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Michael » August 7, 2012, 12:06 pm

T_R wrote:
Michael wrote:People don't seem to understand that the concept of 'free speech' is not about some unfettered right to say whatever you want to whoever you want with any ramifications.
What is it then, Michael?
In case of confusion my initial post intended to say 'without' any ramifications.

Well for starters we don't even have a Bill of Rights in Australia to begin with, so its something of an implied right. But in any event my issue isn't so much with allowing people to say what they want, but taking away the right of those who are harmed to take action. The argument that the prosecution of Andrew Bolt 'undermined' the concept of free speech is rubbish - you can still say what you like, but there's an onus on you to actually be accountable for what you say. Abbott is right in the sense that 'free speech' allows you to be rude, incorrect, objectionable and damaging - but it shouldn't provide you with a forcefield that makes you untouchable if you do so.

This is a classic example of the kind of dog-whistle rhetoric Abbott engages in.
Image

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » August 7, 2012, 1:20 pm

Michael wrote:
T_R wrote:
Michael wrote:People don't seem to understand that the concept of 'free speech' is not about some unfettered right to say whatever you want to whoever you want with any ramifications.
What is it then, Michael?
In case of confusion my initial post intended to say 'without' any ramifications.

Well for starters we don't even have a Bill of Rights in Australia to begin with, so its something of an implied right. But in any event my issue isn't so much with allowing people to say what they want, but taking away the right of those who are harmed to take action. The argument that the prosecution of Andrew Bolt 'undermined' the concept of free speech is rubbish - you can still say what you like, but there's an onus on you to actually be accountable for what you say. Abbott is right in the sense that 'free speech' allows you to be rude, incorrect, objectionable and damaging - but it shouldn't provide you with a forcefield that makes you untouchable if you do so.

This is a classic example of the kind of dog-whistle rhetoric Abbott engages in.
Shame there is so many dogs who come running :nooo

Stuat
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6860
Joined: July 9, 2005, 9:41 am

Racism in Australia

Post by Stuat » August 7, 2012, 1:53 pm

From memory, technically, there is no "right" to free speech in Australia. From memory, the closest thing we have is the high court decision giving us the right to freedom of political expression at election time.

Michael
Mal Meninga
Posts: 29295
Joined: May 2, 2007, 3:44 pm
Location: Clovelly

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Michael » August 7, 2012, 1:59 pm

That's what I said - its implied, we have no Bill of Rights to speak of.

EDIT - sorry Stuat.
Last edited by Michael on August 7, 2012, 2:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image

Stuat
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6860
Joined: July 9, 2005, 9:41 am

Racism in Australia

Post by Stuat » August 7, 2012, 2:05 pm

Was agreeing with you Michael :)

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13410
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: Racism in Australia

Post by Green eyed Mick » August 7, 2012, 2:10 pm

The right to freedom of speech is murky even in places where it is a constitutional right. That being said Bolt or anyone else should be allowed to say what ever the hell he wants. However if the racist douche nozzle causes harm to someone than that person should also have the right for the matter to be resolved before a court. If Abbott removes Section 18C they will no longer have that right and douche nozzles like Bolt will be able to be more brazen with their 'thoughts' and published 'opinions'

Post Reply