Tasmanian Times


Pressure Turnbull on marriage equality free vote




Advocates have called on heads of Australia’s state and territory governments to urge the Prime Minister to allow a free vote on marriage equality when they meet in Hobart tomorrow.

All of Australia’s state and territory leaders support marriage equality, as does the Prime Minister himself, with the only barrier being the absence of a free vote for federal government members so the reform can pass.

Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group spokesperson, Rodney Croome, said,

“We urge heads of state and territory governments to demonstrate their support for marriage equality by jointly urging Mr Turnbull to allow a free vote so the reform can pass.”

“Tasmanian Liberal Premier, Will Hodgman, has honoured the Liberal Party principle of individual freedom by allowing his MPs a free vote on marriage equality, setting a precedent for Mr Turnbull to do the same.”

“A recent poll by Galaxy Research showed that the Turnbull Government risks losing office if it fails to allow a free vote and resolve marriage equality asap.”

Heads of state, territory and federal governments meet in Hobart tomorrow for the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) meeting, the top intergovernmental forum in Australia.
Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group spokesperson, Rodney Croome

Author Credits: [show_post_categories parent="no" parentcategory="writers" show = "category" hyperlink="yes"]


  1. TV Resident

    June 7, 2017 at 8:52 pm

    No. 1…We were told that a plebiscite is not binding either way…So if the plebiscite costs millions of $$$$s to run why not spend that money on a referendum instead??? At least a referendum is binding.

  2. Neil Aitchison

    June 7, 2017 at 6:39 pm

    We voted for a plebiscite at the last federal election and won, so we want a plebiscite. No other way will be acceptable in a democracy.

    We can avoid the costs of same sex marriage disputes in Australia by simply leaving the Marriage Act as it is – no cost there (also, we are a fiat currency, so the government issues the money therefore it will not cost anything), plus if there is ever another plebiscite proposed, the money doesn’t just disappear – it goes into the pockets and communities of casual AEC workers (or AusPost workers if there is a postal vote). What people do in their bedrooms is their business, but marriage is a bit more than sex acts, and by historical definitions is a bit more than just the love between two people. Quite a bit more.

    If we need laws on marriage then we need to talk about what “legal marriage” is, who it affects and how this new marriage concept (that includes same sex couples and inevitably a multitude of other relationship options) should be defined as seeing as anyone using the new marriage definition would be describing a marriage that is different to the way that we currently use the word marriage…….this is why Parliament in 2004 voted on the Marriage Act when John Howard was Prime Minister (to reflect the Common Law) and it passed with the support of Labor politicians, so that is what we have today and the matter should be done and dusted. Labor wants a conscience vote in Parliament but they themselves have a binding “yes” policy on all Labor MPs in the coming election, so there is no conscience vote on their side….and Why cant the electorate be allowed a conscience vote?….but no, Labor, Greens, NXT and Hinch blocked the plebiscite. Plus, there have already been about 18 attempts in Parliament to pass a same sex marriage bill and ALL have failed – so it already has been put to parliament.

    If there is a concern that any future plebiscite is the “majority voting on the rights of the minority” (as we hear the same sex proponents claim), then a parliamentary vote is also a form of majority deciding on the rights of the minority (ie. a majority of MPs need to pass the bill to make it Law). However, the same sex marriage people want the homosexual marriage Law and are facilitating such an intense push that it requires an expensive solution to resolve. They are continually trying to game the political system (and create the allusion of public support) to get the result they want without the public supporting it….they are trying to railroad it into existence using name-calling, public name/shame/boycotting and emotive propaganda slogans. If they are so confident of public support, then why did they reject a plebiscite? They are doing the same tactics with unSafe Schools “gender fluidity”, promiscuous “disRespectful Relationships and the “Anti-male Identification” programs in schools to try and create a intermixed, gender-irrelevant society. They cause the problems and then claim to be part of the solutions.

    They claim that suicides and depression will occur which, by putting such ideas into people’s heads, facilitates a self-fulfilling prophecy. Their suffering that they claim to have is all self-inflicted. They are pushing for a pipe dream that smokes up the room and nothing more. Or to put it another way: they sow the wind and reap the whirlwind. The propaganda is like the sound of one hand clapping – it is slanted and skewed to dress up homosexuality without warning of all the dangers associated with the homosexual lifestyle. The multi-coloured rainbow (which is in the sky for everyone to enjoy and has been stolen by the homosexual movement to represent their cause) is really coloured green because of the lefties. The “too fragile” claim is made even more of a mockery when homosexual activists repeat the supposedly suicidal-provoking, homophobic, bigoted statements to name/shame/boycott the accused – that’s right…. the so-called “hate speech” that they claim is coming from the anti-SSM side are repeated over and over again by the pro-side to embarrass people (just look at the GLORIA awards who give spoof awards for the worst-of-the-worst “homophobic” comments) thereby broadcasting all the “hate speech” even more. They say it is “no one else’s business what they do in the bedroom”, and yet they want the government (a public forum), the protests/marches (on public streets) and social media to see all their bedroom activities and then they get upset when the public responds?….if the sow the wind, they reap the whirlwind – they are constantly doing/saying back at themselves the very things that they say shouldn’t be done/said. Children are being told “you are being reject by all those anti-gay people” until the child believes what they are being told – it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy.

  3. Christopher Eastman-Nagle

    June 7, 2017 at 6:03 pm

    I am a great supporter of a plebiscite because what it will do is provide those who wish to protect the reproductive commons a place at the table of debate that isn’t controlled and mediated by the homosexual lobby and its ideological sponsors.

    And when that happens, they will not be able to get away with characterizing politically principled opposition to their agenda using a spurious pseudo-scientific and prejudicial stereotyping smear campaign.

    And naturally, they do not want to have a real debate where fundamental social axioms are argued out on a level playing field where they cannot dominate the proceedings.

    And the risk for them is that they will be ‘divisively’ exposed as opportunists battening on an almost destroyed social commons, and who are getting a free ride on the libertarian, deregulatory and privatizing agenda of indulgence capitalism, its lobbying/influence peddling templates and its consumerist ideology.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Receive our newsletter

Copyright © Tasmanian Times. Site by Pixel Key

To Top