All I can say is that she deserves everything she gets. I was watching the program and it was disgusting, she is a total sell out. Gay marriage is a human right not an issue and it should be treated accordingly, particularly in nation such as Australia. This is evident of the christian lobby wielding too much influence in the Labor Party. It exposes Labor for what they really are, traitors of the left and truly in the right camp. As for Richo's comments well if we have a gay representative in parliament that does not represent our views well we're better off not having one: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/wong-branded-traitor-by-gays-and-lesbians/story-fn59niix-1225897735066 Heres another one including criticism from Australian Marriage equality: "Gays call Wong a hypocrite" - http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/gays-call-wong-a-hypocrite/story-fn59niix-1225896770041 and this is what she actually said on the program: [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9hM--P_9BQ[/YOUTUBE]
I read about this on SameSame. I just had to laugh about it. Only way that i could brush it off. It is indeed extremely disappointing.
You aren't seeing the bigger picture. Gay Marriage is currently unachveivable and to openly support it would alienate voters that Labor need to keep government. I would rather see a sellout in government than a party with a leader who is intimidated by gays.
It seems most politcians are complete sell outs, the only thing they care about is getting into power. Its sad that policy has to be changed to appease a group of voters though. In the UK, this wasn't really an issue at all. The Labour Government did a lot for lgbt equality (and other groups of people) in 13 years without much dissent, at least from voters (three convincing election wins). They sold out in many other areas though sadly. Politicians are always more interested in what most people think rather than sticking to their own principles sadly
quoted for truth. I think she may be doing something brave. By baring the brunt of an outburst of scorn from the gay and lesbian community, she can still remain sure that the vast majority of socially progressive LGBTs (and c'mon, how many of us aren't socially progressive?) will still not vote liberal in the federal election, since he has flat out described himself as 'intimidated' and 'threatened' by gay people... That's all she needs to do. After the election, she can come out and declare her support for gay marriage, with a safe period of 4 years for the idea to settle into the bogan-ville shitholes of australia before the next election. However... All of this depends on whether Gillard is in with social justice and comes around on the issue after she's elected. Pressure from the greens might have some influence on that, especially if they get more presence in the senate, and even more so if they win a lower house seat, they have a good shot at the seat of Melbourne. so things aren't looking bad for the moment... I reckon we just need to be patient for a few months. We can be afford to be more pissed off later, after it doesn't matter that we're annoying all the bigots and rednecks who might actually be voting labour (and not liberal) in a month's time.
"bogan-ville shitholes"? That is exactly the wrong kind of attitude to have. Like most people, Australians will be voting on more important issues such as climate change and who better manages the economy. I for one think that Tony Abott would make a better PM than Gillard who did a terrible job as Education Minister and stabbed Kevin Rudd in the back. She has no substance or credibility. Sure, Tony has been on record of saying things like that but does that mean that i agree with everything he does or says? No it doesn't, but that is the problem with the two-party system where we have to pidgeon-hole our ideaologies to what the parties want and not the politicians doing what the people want. Penny Wong is toeing the party line by upholding this discrimination instead of having the courage of her convictions to stand up and say that "no, this is wrong and it has gone on for long enough." And I think that is disgraceful and shallow. Only the Greens and a few lone voices in the Labor Party have spoken out on their support for Gay marriage. What did the Greens do? They introduced legislation, it was voted down by both parties. They have been calling for a conscience vote from the parties when they reintroduce it after the election, something Labor and Liberal have refused so far to do. Let us hope Wong has a bit more conviction to sway the cabinet to let a conscience vote on the matter but that probably wont happen becauses she 'opposes' it and if they win the election... I do agree with you on the Greens, the more seats they get, the better chance we have on getting a strong third option in Australian politics. Watching Cristine Milne on that program showed that the Greens are the only ones ready to take leadership on this matter and call for complete change.
replying to Bevo, "bogan-ville shitholes" refers less to actual tangible places and more to a general social pervasion of boganism. I just like colourful descriptions at times, my attempt at a funny bone. sounds like you're more fiscally driven than me. I'm all about social justice being paramount, and an economy in deficit (especially in the current environment) often means progress. And besides, i could never ever bring myself to vote for tony abbott after the disgustingly backward things he has said. He represents social regression, which is a far bigger crime than a red number instead of a black one. With regard to gay rights, there is no better outcome than for labour to win. Except for labour to win and for the greens to get more MPs. Agree to disagree on the comments specific to other MPs, that's an issue for another thread. I for one will be voting under the line greens with prefs which will end up on top of labour's pile.
Bam! haha, had to point this out... called it! Woooo!! Adam Bandt, Seat of Melbourne! Weeks in advance! Now, hopefully the REST of the wish comes true.... :-/
"Gays call Wong a hypocrite." "Gays" is such a large and vague group of people. Though I can't say I necessarily agree with her, I think it's wrong to use "gays" in such a broad sense. For one, she's gay herself. Seems like more segregation and inequality. Not to mention aren't there "straights" who would similarly disagree with her and call her an alleged "traitor?"
This is still going on. http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/8121320/greens-step-up-same-sex-marriage-campaign
