Atheist leader against gay marriage for religious reasons - WTF?!

[lewisnotmiller]

Okay, so I've whacked this in Down Under Politics, because that's what it is. But I really hope people outside the Aussie/NZ group comment on this, since I am interested in opinion;

First, an article which asks a pretty relevant question;

If Julia Gillard Is Such an Atheist, Where

My take is that we have an atheist Prime Minister (who is in trouble at the polls) not wanting to **** off Christian conservatives. We have a Catholic conservative opposition leader staying true to how he has always thought about the issue (despite his own sister being openly gay) and a Christian former-Prime Minister who is either;

1) Had an epiphany and now agrees with gay marriage after previously not (in particular, when he was actually in power)

OR

2) Is cynically courting mass-popularism to get back in power, figuring the fact that he's a Christian will still give him a chance to retain some of the Christian vote.

Frankly, I could put all three of them in a leaky boat and send them out to sea, but if I had to cast my lot in with any of them right now it would be Rudd, because I can at least see he might be embracing a more liberal Christian view.

Of the three, I'm most disappointed with Gillard on this. Her lack of leadership and direction on the issue is staggering.

 

[freethinker44]

Yup, politicians can be pretty sleazy like that. When Dick Cheney changed his position on gay marriage because his daughter came out as a lesbian, I actually got a little ****** off and disliked him even more for it, even though I think he is making the right decision now. It's like, how much damage does VP of the US cause to a group of people by being against basic rights for them and then his daughter comes out and he changes his mind. Great, wonderful. It's nice that he changed his worldview to accept his daughter's lifestyle, but what about all the other gay and lesbian couples he completely disrespected? They are all someone's sons and daughters but he didn't care about that. He doesn't care about other people's lives. Only his own. All those people he said don't deserve fundamental rights, but oh wait, his daughters gay? "OK let's change the laws now, they effect my family". I have never been so ****** off at someone for making the right decision.

 

[LuisDantas]

I'm not sure it is reasonable to expect any politician to disregard the impact of the laws on their own personal convenience.

Of course, most of the time they will exploit loopholes, custom-shape the laws or simply act outside the law altogether instead of changing them. Law is way over-rated.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

This is a shameless bump, done in the form of a commitment for the future.
I hereby commit to put all topics about Australian Politics in the General Debates forum, since this one has tumbleweeds.

 

[Pagan_Patriot]

She's pretty attractive though.

 

[crossfire]

You have mandatory voting there, no? (Like you get fined if you don't vote.)

It really changes the political game, no? No more induced voter apathy. Instead of avoiding the disgusting politicians by becoming apathetic, the people have to face the disgusting politicians or be fined. I'm sure this makes many politicians quite uncomfortable...

 

[lewisnotmiller]

You have mandatory voting there, no? (Like you get fined if you don't vote.)

It really changes the political game, no? No more induced voter apathy. Instead of avoiding the disgusting politicians by becoming apathetic, the people have to face the disgusting politicians or be fined. I'm sure this makes many politicians quite uncomfortable...

Yup. Mandatory voting.
I'm not sure that I'd be in the majority with this opinion, but I'm very much in favour of it, too.
You can turn up to the voting booth and put a blank slip in if you want...not like you're forced to choose a politician.

Compulsory Voting In Australia | AustralianPolitics.com

The one downside are the donkey votes. People who just put 1,2,3,4,5 down the list of candidates. There is a small, but very real bias towards the first listed candidate.

Meh...we have preferential voting. Confusing as hell for many, so they just...turn off their brain. Drives me nuts. Just put in a blank slip for goodness sake.

 

[Breathe]

Yup. Mandatory voting.

I'm of the opinion that compulsory voting is a good thing; people can always put in the blank slip.

People here rarely vote out of laziness and then proceed to whine for the next four to five years, non-stop, and say "somebody should do something about it". Does my head in.

As to the OP, though.... "Sigh." People.

 

[Jeremy Taylor]

I'm against gay marriage, but Gillard wasn't against gay marriage so much as against marriage. She thought it was an out-dated, patriarchal institution and didn't wish to give any more credence or respect to the institution.

The irony is the press and Australian official culture didn't bat an eye-lid at such radical views, but Tony Abbott's very mild social conservatism is considered scandalous.

 

[Jeremy Taylor]

You have mandatory voting there, no? (Like you get fined if you don't vote.)

It really changes the political game, no? No more induced voter apathy. Instead of avoiding the disgusting politicians by becoming apathetic, the people have to face the disgusting politicians or be fined. I'm sure this makes many politicians quite uncomfortable...

What it means is you have even more people who have no idea about the issues or about good government vote. Hardly a good thing. We should be trying to have more thought and knowledge in government, not less.

 

[Alceste]

Awesome. Throw gays under the bus for votes. Lovely leadership there.

 

[Jeremy Taylor]

What votes? She didn't do it for votes. She did it because she didn't believe in marriage and thought that gays should not be fighting to be married because marriage is out-dated and patriarchal and should be phased out. I didn't like Gillard much, but she was consistent enough.

 

[Bunyip]

Julia Gillard was prime minister for a very short time and was in a very difficult position. Her stance on gay marriage was a product of her need tp shore up support from the Christian lobby. Not a moral or ethical position.

She was not an atheist leader, she was a political leader.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yup, politicians can be pretty sleazy like that. When Dick Cheney changed his position on gay marriage because his daughter came out as a lesbian, I actually got a little ****** off and disliked him even more for it.....

I looked around the internet, & didn't find a mention of this.
How do we know it?
(I did find that his support goes back to at least 2000.)

You'd prefer that he oppose gay marriage?
Weird.

 

[Bunyip]

Awesome. Throw gays under the bus for votes. Lovely leadership there.

The worst thing about that Alceste is that she was wrong, it cost her supporters rather than gained them. She had great potential and if she had favoured her values over political expediency wpuld have made a great leader.

 

[Jeremy Taylor]

Julia Gillard was prime minister for a very short time and was in a very difficult position. Her stance on gay marriage was a product of her need tp shore up support from the Christian lobby. Not a moral or ethical position.

She was not an atheist leader, she was a political leader.

Shore up the Christian lobby? That ever so powerful group in Australian politics, and one which naturally supports Labor, of course.

Electorally, Labor were more afraid of offending their ethnic supporters, many non-Christians, than the mainstream Christian vote.

But really, as I said, and as Gillard herself has made clear, her opposition was actually founded more on her radical feminism than anything else.