Australia SSM Plebiscite Salt - RAPE THE STRAIGHTS RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE

[HG 400]

If the baker just says "Well I'm happy to sell you fags some cake but no I won't custom-make that fag cake for your fag wedding" I don't see how it violates any antidiscrimination laws. There's a big difference between "I'm not serving your kind of people" and "I'm not working on that kind of project"

 

[Sissy Galvez]

What I don't undertand is why you would want to force somebody to make something for your wedding. It's a commission, if they don't want my money, why would I insist on that person on particular when they'll likely do a shitty job just as an extra fuck you?

I walk into a bakery to commission something and the black owner says "Fuck off honky, I don't do shit for beckys", I'm sure as shit not going to insist on hiring them, god knows there'd be spit (at best) in anything I bought there.

They view forcing someone to do something against their beliefs as a form of punishment. They want to humiliate them for daring to having a different opinion.

I support gay marriage but if some religious fucko doesn’t want to bake gays a cake I say go spend your money somewhere else where it’s appreciated. Getting the government involved to create snowflake laws is like the last thing we should be doing.

 

[The Valeyard]

 

[BR55]

^Oh FFS. It's a plebiscite. The Government is just asking people what they think. It is a literal glorified 120 million dollar opinion poll. The Government is not required to do anything and probably will not do anything.

 

[The Valeyard]

^Oh FFS. It's a plebiscite. The Government is just asking people what they think. It is a literal glorified 120 million dollar opinion poll. The Government is not required to do anything and probably will not do anything.

Well, yeah, but why would these actors inform themselves on an issue when they can instead show off their virtue by reciting empty platitudes to the camera?

 

[The Valeyard]

Current Year Man ridicules Australia's 'pointless' marriage equality postal survey

Spoiler: Article Text

Comedian John Oliver has discovered Australia’s $122m voluntary postal survey on marriage equality and is baffled by the process and some of the arguments by the no campaign.

Oliver took aim at the survey in a segment for his television show Last Week Tonight, which aired in Australia on Monday, calling it “a dispiriting, ultimately pointless process” and “the weirdest waste of Australian money since every Baz Luhrmann movie ever made”.

Opening by calling Australia “the Outback Steakhouse of countries”, Oliver said the survey was an “odd thing to do”, particularly when successive polls show that around two-thirds of the voting population support legalising marriage equality.

He then turned his attention to the no campaign, which he said was both “truly toxic” and “ridiculous”.

Of particular interest was an argument made on Sky News by backbench Liberal MP Kevin Andrews, who dismissed the need for marriage equality by saying there were “all sorts of affectionate relationships” that were not called marriage.

Andrews, who incidentally was named Natural family Man of the Year in 2014, elaborated his point by saying: “I have an affectionate relationship with my cycling mates, we go cycling on the weekends, but that’s not marriage.”

Oliver had the same reaction as many Australians to this comparison, namely: it’s not the same thing at all.

“Yeah, I mean, we do fuck,” Oliver said, affecting a broad Australian accent. “We finish cycling, we slowly peel our cycling clothes off by the side of the bucolic country road and we fuck, but that’s not marriage, that’s fucking your cycling mates ... You cycle, you fuck. You cycle, you fuck. It’s not marriage though.”

He also ridiculed no campaigner Sophie York, who suggested the “marriage” in gay marriage be replaced with another word, like “garriage”.

“That is a stupid word,” Oliver said. “Except in the very rare case of a marriage between two men and named Gary, in which case, obviously they should be getting ‘garried’.”

He also expressed sympathy to Tasmanian anarchist Astro Labe, alias DJ Funknukl, who explained that he had head-butted former prime minister and marriage equality opponent Tony Abbott on the streets of Hobart not for his views on marriage equality, but because he thought: “There’s Tony Abbott, I’m going to head-butt him.”

“I am in no way condoning Tony Abbott being attacked,” Oliver said. “What I will say is: thinking to yourself ‘there’s Tony Abbott, I’m going to head-butt him’, is entirely natural. It’s an automatic human response.”

Astro Labe has been charged with causing harm to a public official, an offence that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.

However Oliver drew the line at supporting Macklemore, who performed his 2013 marriage equality anthem Same Love to a backdrop of rainbow-coloured fireworks at the NRL grand final earlier this month after opponents of marriage equality, led by Abbott, failed in a campaign to have the rapper either replaced as a performer or balanced out by someone performing a song in favour of “traditional” marriage.
The controversy surrounding his performance, which was booked months before the postal survey was announced, saw Same Love rocket to the top of the Australian iTunes chart. Macklemore pledged to donate the Australian proceeds from the song to the marriage equality campaign.

“OK, so, that is putting me in a bit of a tough position because I do support gay marriage but I refuse to ever say: let Macklemore perform,” Oliver said.

Voting in the postal survey closes on 7 November. The results will be published on 15 November.

 

[GabeRegan]

I'm sure this will change people's minds just as much as his Donald Dumpf video.

 

[BF 388]

Whatever the outcome, the chimpouts when people realise the government isn't actually required to do anything with the results is where the real salt will come from.

 

[heathercho]

^Oh FFS. It's a plebiscite. The Government is just asking people what they think. It is a literal glorified 120 million dollar opinion poll. The Government is not required to do anything and probably will not do anything.

Turnbull has already put his support behind it, promising a "result" by Christmas. He fully intends to go forward, he's that much of a virtue signalling retard.

 

[BR55]

Turnbull has already put his support behind it, promising a "result" by Christmas. He fully intends to go forward, he's that much of a virtue signalling exceptional individual.

Interesting. Are we talking Results or "Results" here? Cause personally my moneys on "Results". Virtue Signalers rarely get Results in my experience.

 

[heathercho]

"Many people will vote 'yes' – as I will – because they believe the right to marry is a conservative ideal as much as any other conservative principle," he said.

Mr Turnbull pointed out same-sex marriage had been delivered by parliaments, courts and people's votes in many countries, including those most culturally similar to Australia: the US, Britain, Canada and New Zealand.

"In any one of those nations, has the sky fallen in? Has life as we know it ground to a halt? Has traditional marriage been undermined? And the answer is plainly no."

Source.

Gay Marriage could be legal by Christmas, Predicts Brandis.

Since Turnbull is the way he is, I would bet that it's more likely that this "survey" more serves the purpose to him of seeing which way he should push on gay marriage, in order to try to solidify/encourage popularity for himself.
If it turns out No, then he doesn't have to do dick. He can take his time and not make any moves that could damage his leadership. If it turns out Yes, then he can smile smugly and say "Well, we have to do what is right, we have to be loving and pass this bill". Public and Social pressure pushes senate to pass the bill in the 2 sitting weeks they have left, Turnbull is king Uncle Malcolm who passed the fag marriage bill and voila legal gay marriage by Christmas. Or whenever. But I would strongly bet that that is his exact tactic.

The guy has no morals, no platform standpoints, no absolute convictions. His only motivation is popularity, power and swanning around with his title as PM. He doesn't support a true conservative platform and he's allowed people to demonise debate on the issue, when he should have been more of an equaliser.

Also just to add, why people are so mad about this is solely due to the tactics from the "Yes" side and how they've been allowed to carry them out unchecked. That and the Safe Schools program issue. But that's a whole other debate.

We should have had a plebiscite about the NBN instead of this. That is something that will actually effect everyone.

 

[Begemot]

Source.

Gay Marriage could be legal by Christmas, Predicts Brandis.

Since Turnbull is the way he is, I would bet that it's more likely that this "survey" more serves the purpose to him of seeing which way he should push on gay marriage, in order to try to solidify/encourage popularity for himself.
If it turns out No, then he doesn't have to do dick. He can take his time and not make any moves that could damage his leadership. If it turns out Yes, then he can smile smugly and say "Well, we have to do what is right, we have to be loving and pass this bill". Public and Social pressure pushes senate to pass the bill in the 2 sitting weeks they have left, Turnbull is king Uncle Malcolm who passed the fag marriage bill and voila legal gay marriage by Christmas. Or whenever. But I would strongly bet that that is his exact tactic.

The guy has no morals, no platform standpoints, no absolute convictions. His only motivation is popularity, power and swanning around with his title as PM. He doesn't support a true conservative platform and he's allowed people to demonise debate on the issue, when he should have been more of an equaliser.

Also just to add, why people are so mad about this is solely due to the tactics from the "Yes" side and how they've been allowed to carry them out unchecked. That and the Safe Schools program issue. But that's a whole other debate.

We should have had a plebiscite about the NBN instead of this. That is something that will actually effect everyone.

The strange thing about Australia is that the actual Liberal tradition has been co-opted in the 'broad church' of the 'Liberal' party. In the UK it's the Lib Dems with a history of a government winning party up till 1910, in Canada the Liberal tradition has been the governing tradition. In the U.S, conservatives convinced themselves that a Neo-Liberal grinner like Obama was an actual socialist. But in Australia Liberals are just called 'moderates' or traitors by Cory Bernadi.

Liberalism in this country is essentially business-friendly 'agility' as Turnbull calls it, nothing more.

 

[The Valeyard]

Gay couple voting against same-sex marriage respond to Current Year Man

Spoiler: Article Text

THE gay couple who were roasted by British comedian John Oliver for being against same-sex marriage have spoken about being mocked on one of America’s most popular late-night shows.

Oliver, who hosts the US current affairs show Last Week Tonight, slammed Australia’s same-sex marriage debate as on Monday night, calling it “truly toxic” and naming and shaming the gay couple from Wollongong, NSW.

Mark Poidevin and Ben Rogers, who have been together for 15 years, sat down with ABC’s 7.30 in September to speak about why they were voting no in the non-legally binding same-sex marriage postal survey.

The couple were slammed at the time of the ABC interview but the backlash around their decision to vote no seemed to have died off — until John Oliver dragged them back into the spotlight.

Speaking to Channel Nine, Mr Poidevin said they took Oliver’s biting criticism lightly.

“Ben and I actually laughed when we first saw it,” he told Nine. “But we were surprised with what they actually did with the footage and how it came out.”

The pair were lambasted after the 7.30 story, a report that featured them saying they were voting no because “if we make one exception for one community, that being the same-sex couples, where does it stop?” Mr Poidevin, a staunch Catholic said.

Mr Poidevin said John Oliver’s take on it was “a complete joke” and the comedian’s summary on their views was the “total opposite” of what they’d discussed with one of Last Week Tonight’s researchers before it went to air.

“I actually got contacted by a researcher on John Oliver prior. They said they were going to be airing the footage and asked if I stood by what I said.

“I told them it was completely accurate but clarified that I do support civil unions,” he said.

And despite the couple becoming the laughing stock of John Oliver’s show, Mr Poidevin said he wasn’t expecting anything “intelligent” from the comedian.

“He is a comedian. We were not expecting an amazingly intelligent presentation on the whole discussion. It’s just a late night TV show,” he said.

And despite the couple laughing off the scathing Oliver piece, Mr Poidevin said his family didn’t take it as well.
“Family in America said it was a complete hatchet job and my mum called me absolutely furious, asking ‘how could they do that to you?’,” Mr Poidevin told Nine.

Oliver’s segment, which labelled Australia “the Outback Steakhouse of countries” and called the same-sex marriage postal survey “the weirdest waste of Australian money since every Baz Luhrmann movie ever made”, featured the comedian telling Mr Poidevin to break up with Mr Rogers.

The Last Week Tonight segment featured a snippet of the 7.30 report where Mr Poidevin said he used to support legalising same-sex marriage.

“I used to be a supporter of same-sex marriage, I mean I proposed to Ben five years ago,” he said.
However, Mr Rogers bluntly told him: “I don’t think it’s my cup of tea.”

“Two things, Ben, you are cold-blooded and Mark you can do so much better than him. You deserve someone who’s committed to you, as you are to them ... Don’t stay together for the dog, he knows you’re unhappy too,” Oliver said.

Same-sex marriage? Twitter says ‘no’, university study shows

Spoiler: Article Text

COULD it be a win for the No vote in the $122 million same-sex marriage postal survey? Academics from Griffith University says ‘yes’ to that.

They say an academic study of Twitter opinion points to No narrowly prevailing in the poll, which closes on November 7.

And the advanced data analysis techniques used by Griffith University's’s David Tuffley and Bela Stantic has also predicted results other polls got wrong, including the result of the 2016 Presidential election which saw Donald Trump become US President.

While 72 per cent of tweets favoured same-sex marriage, less than 15 per cent were sent by people over the age of 55, the Griffith University study shows.

Tuffley and Stantic used the “uncannily accurate” analytics to look at publicly-available data from 458,565 tweets throughout October.

At first look, the Tweets appeared to show overwhelming support for the yes vote.

But when the pair took the sentiment of unique users into account, the adjusted ‘yes’ vote figure went from 72 per cent down to 57 per cent.

It dropped further — below the magic 50 per cent mark — when they took into account the low proportion of tweets from people over 55, and matched it against the 36 per cent of the voter pool they represent. That tinkering saw the support for ‘yes’ drop to 49 per cent.

“So it is likely to be a close-run result, much closer than the earlier polls suggested, and leaning in the direction of ‘no,’ Professor Stantic and Mr Tuffley said.

“One of the problems with predicting poll outcomes is that people are often reluctant to say out loud what they really think about issues,” the pair argue.

“What people say online can often be more accurate than what they say to each other in this age of political correctness.”

With less than a week to go before the postal poll closes, 12.3 million eligible Aussies have had their say. That’s a return rate of 77 per cent of the 16 million forms sent out.

A Newspoll conducted for the Australian in October, when an estimated 11 million votes had been returned, revealed 59 per cent of those who had returned their ballots had voted yes. Just 38 per cent of those surveyed said they were against.

Polls have suggested most Australians support same-sex marriage, with the Yes campaign supporting previous updates on how many Australians had voted.

“This is incredible, it’s such a wonderful sign of how seriously people take this issue and an incredible reflection on the Australian people who have understood the power of this vote,” Equality Campaign director Tiernan Brady said after an ABS update last month.

A recent poll showed almost 60 per cent of those who had already voted had ticked Yes.

But this lead has steadily been decreasing over the course of the campaign, with Yes campaigners now focusing on “lazy” Yes voters to have their say.

They worry that about two million people under the age of 35, most of who say they would vote Yes, who have yet to actually cast their vote.

“There is no room for complacency and no reason to think someone else’s vote will win this,” Brady said.

Meanwhile No campaigners dispute the polls.

“The reality is that support for gay marriage has never been what the yes campaign has claimed,” a Coalition for Marriage spokesman said.

“There are still millions of Australians who are yet to vote in this survey. We are going for every last one. If they, like so many others, are tired of the bullying tactics of the Yes camp, then they should make sure they vote ‘no’ and return their ballots as soon as possible.”

 

[heathercho]

Legit "Slammed the debate". Just think about that for a moment.

Yes campaign (lol) fears No Campaign could "hatch a plan that could damage the SSM vote".

Spoiler: Gay people sure think a lot about fucking everyone in the ass with their opinions

‘Utterly disgraceful’: The plan being hatched that could see gay people lose out even if SSM vote wins
YES campaigners are warning of an “utterly disgraceful” under-the-radar plot that could damage same-sex marriage plans.

Benedict Brook@BenedictBrook news.com.auNOVEMBER 3, 20174:31PM


IF THE postal survey goes the way pollsters predict, Australians will give a resounding Yes to same-sex marriage on November 15.
But pro-SSM campaigners are increasingly nervous a rearguard action by conservative MPs could mean if they win, gay Australians will lose anyway.
Head of the Equality Campaign, Tiernan Brady, told news.com.au if some politicians got their way, the price for Yes could be the rights of parents in same-sex families watered down and services denied to gay people. Shops could even bar LGBTI customers, he said.
“The No side have made it very clear that in the event of a Yes victory they will try to unravel existing anti-discrimination legislation,” Mr Brady said. “To single out gay people for discrimination is utterly disgraceful.”
If a same-sex marriage law heavily influenced by conservative MPs gets legs, politicians that voted Yes may find themselves in the bizarre position of being unable to vote for legislation that would legalise same-sex marriage.
The No campaign is looking for exemptions in any same-sex marriage law that go far beyond just marriage. Picture: AAP Image/Joe Castro
The No campaign is looking for exemptions in any same-sex marriage law that go far beyond just marriage. Picture: AAP Image/Joe CastroSource:AAP
We’re on the final leg of Australia’s $122 million same-sex marriage survey and the polls are mixed. On Thursday, Griffith University released analysis of tweets on the subject of gay marriage which they said could point to a narrow No victory. David Tuffley and Bela Stantic used the same technique to accurately predict the result of the 2016 Presidential election which saw Donald Trump become US President.
But, multiple other polls show Yes leading No by a large gap. A Galaxy poll of 1000 people, commissioned by PFLAG (Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays), found 66 per cent of people had voted Yes and 78 per cent of Australians wanted gay and straight couples to be treated equally.
An independent news.com.au online poll, of 85,000 people, has an even higher result for Yes with 70 per cent of people in favour of same-sex marriage.
The latest figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics show 12.3 million of the 16 million eligible voters, or 77 per cent, had returned their forms by last Friday.
Despite the potentially huge numbers backing Yes, those opposed to the law change are making a concerted effort to use the ensuing legislation to wind back laws already in place to protect LGBTI people — even in areas unrelated to marriage.


Conservative MPs haven’t gone into detail, but their wishlist could include lessening hate speech laws, axing legislation that gives same-sex parents the same rights as straight parents, barring gay couples from accessing IVF and allowing parents to remove kids from any school lesson that even fleetingly mentions gay people.
There is also the prospect of businesses being given the green light to refuse to serve anyone who is gay, not just those organising same-sex weddings.
Many of the proposed changes would involve stripping away Australia’s anti-discrimination legislation which protects people based on innate characteristics — such as sexuality — bar a small number of exceptions, usually for religious organisations.
If Yes wins, the actual mechanism to change the law to allow gay couples to wed would be through a marriage bill voted on by MPs.
Currently, a draft bill exists. Written by Liberal Senator Dean Smith, it is backed by many on the Yes side and endorsed by Labor.
There has been a huge turnout in the same-sex marriage survey. Picture: AAP Image/Joel Carrett
There has been a huge turnout in the same-sex marriage survey. Picture: AAP Image/Joel CarrettSource:AAP
Mr Smith’s draft legislation includes a number of exemptions to the law including allowing both religious ministers and marriage celebrants to refuse to officiate same-sex weddings.
The bill would also allow organisations with a solid link to a religious body to opt out. A church, for example, could refuse to rent its hall out for a same-sex wedding.
But some want the exemptions to go further — much further.
This week, it was reported conservative MPs were now drawing up as many as 100 amendments to the bill.
These would be wideranging, according to MP Ian Goodenough who told news.com.au he was working with a gaggle of MPs on major changes. In a phrase that will chill the spine of LGBTI Australians, he said these changes could go “beyond the wedding ceremony”.
“The focus will be in the area of preserving parental rights, freedom of speech, and institutional considerations such as curriculum in schools, access to reproductive technology, correctional facilities, etc,” Mr Goodenough said.
undefined
The Coalition for Marriage, the group stating the case for No, has told news.com.au Mr Smith’s bill was “fundamentally inadequate” and had “failed to address the concerns of millions raised throughout the campaign”.
Sticking to the No’s line that same-sex marriage and schooling were intrinsically linked, a spokeswoman said the bill afforded no protection to faith schools, “in relation to whether they will be forced to teach radical LGBTIQ sex and gender ideology”.
The only draft marriage bill currently in existence has been drafted by WA Senator Dean Smith.
The only draft marriage bill currently in existence has been drafted by WA Senator Dean Smith.Source:News Corp Australia
Fellow WA Liberal Ian Goodenough has said there could be up to 100 amendments to Mr Smith’s bill, many of which could rile the Yes campaign.
Fellow WA Liberal Ian Goodenough has said there could be up to 100 amendments to Mr Smith’s bill, many of which could rile the Yes campaign.Source:News Corp Australia
Along with Mr Goodenough, the push back is being led by MP Andrew Hastie, Senator Eric Abetz and Australian Conservatives leader Cory Bernardi. Former prime ministers John Howard and Tony Abbot are also expected to call for multiple carve outs in any marriage law.
There are other clues to how No campaigners would like to see laws change. The Marriage Alliance has flagged the possibility of a bill that would extend the grounds parents can withdraw children from school to any lessons that might depict same-sex relationships as “normal”.
The Australian Christian Lobby has called for anti-discrimination laws to be “overridden” so businesses can operate “in accordance with their beliefs”.
A new poll says 78 per cent of Australians believe same-sex and straight couples should be treated equally. Picture: James Ross/AAP Image
A new poll says 78 per cent of Australians believe same-sex and straight couples should be treated equally. Picture: James Ross/AAP ImageSource:AAP
Another plan is to widen those who can opt out of providing services to same-sex weddings to “conscientious objectors” — in other words, anyone.
Last year, Mr Bernardi posed the question: “Is it OK for any business to say they simply don’t want your business for any or no reason? Personally I think it is.”
The Equality Campaign’s Mr Brady said winding back equality laws would affect more than just gay people.
“To deny service to whomever you want for whatever reason you want would be a total dismantling of the existing anti-discrimination laws that have served Australia well — and not just LGBTI people but people of faith and different ethnic communities all of who are protected,” he said.
The result is due on November 15. Picture: William West/AFP
The result is due on November 15. Picture: William West/AFPSource:AFP
Mr Brady said there was a worrying whiff of double standards at the heart of the plans.
“Are they proposing that people should be allowed to deny service to those that have had sex before marriage, have used contraceptives, have divorced and remarried?” he questioned. “Or is it just against gay people?
“Both proposals are bad, but to single out gay people for discrimination is utterly disgraceful ... and the Australian people don’t want that.”
Mr Smith backed the comments, telling the West Australian, singling out gay people to be treated lesser to others wouldn’t fly.
“Very, very few Australians would agree that one discrimination should be removed and replaced with other discriminations,” he said.
Neither Mr Goodenough nor the Coalition for Marriage would clarify whether their proposals extended further than just LGBTI people.
Australian Conservatives Senator Cory Bernardi believes any business should be able to refuse any customer for any reason, including simply because they are gay. Picture: AAP Image/Lukas Coch.
Australian Conservatives Senator Cory Bernardi believes any business should be able to refuse any customer for any reason, including simply because they are gay. Picture: AAP Image/Lukas Coch.Source:AAP
Just.equal spokesman, and long-time marriage equality campaigner, Rodney Croome said he wasn’t surprised at the furious efforts to add amendments to the bill. But it was the reaction to the plans that mattered, he told news.com.au.
“The issue is not that hard line Liberals want to create new forms of discrimination against same-sex couples in return for the right to marry,” Mr Croome said.
“It’s whether moderate Liberals, opposition and crossbenchers and the LGBTI community accept those compromises.
“If Australia votes Yes it will be for full equality for LGBTI, not further discrimination”.
LGBTI Australians will be hoping the first day they can marry is not also the first day they are divorced from reams of other laws that were supposed to protect them.
benedict.brook@news.com.au

This isn't bumfuck Indonesia. They need to calm the fuck down.
No one is going to have signs outside their place of employment that reads "No Fags, No Dykes either".

But it is from their own playbook.

“First, we have three legal/social questions to win: custody rights for gay men and lesbians; the legal right of paedophiles and their young loves; and finally, the sexual rights of children as a whole.” - Gary Dowsett

 

[Terrorist]

i knew i liked aussies for a reason

burn queers, not churches

 

[niggers]

“Two things, Ben, you are cold-blooded and Mark you can do so much better than him. You deserve someone who’s committed to you, as you are to them ... Don’t stay together for the dog, he knows you’re unhappy too,” Oliver said.

straight (ish) guy belittles homosexuals for their nontraditional union

progressive!

 

[neverendingmidi]

So since this is just a useless poll, couldn’t they have just declared gay marriage legal, and not wasted the money? Governments not wasting money, lolololololololol, I kill myself...

 

[Burgers in the ass]

Gay marriage is supposedly going to be announced in about less then an hour from now.

 

[Burgers in the ass]

Sorry for double post, but the survey results came in.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-15/same-sex-marriage-australia-says-yes-to-ssm/9150344

Australians have had their say, with 61.6 per cent of the nation voting Yes to legalising same-sex marriage.

The final count was 7.8 million responses in support of same-sex marriage, and 4.9 million against.

Australian statistician David Kalisch said the final number of responses was 12,727,920 people, representing 79 per cent of eligible Australians.

"This is outstanding for a voluntary survey and well above other voluntary surveys conducted around the world," he said.

"It shows how important this issue is the many Australians."

Follow our live blog for all the reaction to the same-sex marriage survey result.


Mr Kalisch noted participation was strong across every state and territory except in the Northern Territory, where only 58.4 per cent of eligible people responded.

Participation in the survey was over 70 per cent in 146 of the 150 electorates.

"The participation in the survey were slightly higher in older ages and slightly lower in younger age groups but not markedly so," Mr Kalisch said.

"It is worth noting our youngest on the electoral roll, the 18- and 19-year-olds, responded strongly, with around 78 per cent participation."

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull addressed the nation minutes after the result was announced, promising to bring the same-sex marriage bill to a vote in Parliament before Christmas.

"They have spoken in their millions and they have voted overwhelmingly Yes for marriage equality," he said.

"They voted Yes for fairness, Yes for commitment, Yes for love.

"And now it is up to us here in the Parliament of Australia to get on with it, to get on with the job the Australian people have tasked asked to do and get this done. This year, before Christmas — that must be our commitment."

More to come.

edit: I got beaten to it https://kiwifarms.net/threads/australia-votes-yes-on-gay-marriage-in-postal-survey.36484/

 

[Medicated]

Here comes that saaaaaalt

What the hell is this? A reasoned response? God what is this the 1950's?