Skip to content

Brisbane same-sex marriage rally

29 November, 2009

It was hot and muggy and due to camera dramas I only have a few shots at Queens Park and the march was taken with a camera phone.


Update. Photos from the Melbourne rally at An Onymous Lefty.

15 Comments leave one →
  1. 29 November, 2009 10:49 am

    Not exactly a big turn out, maybe this is not the “Big” issue that you think it is Ilieum

  2. 29 November, 2009 11:20 am

    I must have stuffed up the pics so I have ‘moved’ your comment, Iain.

    I thought it was a pretty fair turn out despite the heat, but that’s beside the point. On questions of social justice, I always try and place myself in the position of the other person and consider the issue from there. From this position, if I wished to marry someone of the same sex, it would seem fair and equitable to marry under the same conditions of those that marry someone of the opposite sex.

  3. ribbet permalink
    29 November, 2009 11:23 am


    Just issues do not always have a history of big turn outs.

  4. 29 November, 2009 2:36 pm

    I just think that with all of the recent reforms removing discrimination against same sex couples that not allowing them to call their unions a “marriage” is a small thing in reality and they should wait until the community at large thinks that this is a necessary change. As it stands I don’t think that the public are willing to endorse such a change and in a democracy such endorsement is essential for such a change.

  5. 29 November, 2009 6:09 pm

    The last time I checked in, laws still don’t allow same-sex couples to access each others superannuation. I don’t know if recent reforms have removed this inequality.

  6. 30 November, 2009 12:11 pm

    Iain, it still makes one union less than the other and that is not equality. While it may be fair enough to call that a small thing, it may grow in proportion if it was something that you were excluded from participating in.

    It seems that the majority of Australians do support same-sex marriage:

  7. 30 November, 2009 1:07 pm

    Not lesser Ileum, just different, and therefore worthy of its own distinct place within our legal system.

  8. 30 November, 2009 2:43 pm

    Can’t agree on that one, Iain. To quote the banner ‘Love [relationships/unions] knows no gender’.

    • 30 November, 2009 5:11 pm

      I agree totally, ileum. Congratulations on the rally, I hope it went well for you guys. In regards to Iain Hall’s comments, I have an entire blog meticulously describing why civil unions are not an apt substitute for marriage.
      Take a look. As these separate but equal, equal yet blatantly not, cannot survive in a logical society.
      Have a great one.

      • 1 December, 2009 11:35 am

        Thanks, braidzy, I will have a read.

  9. Diognis permalink
    1 December, 2009 2:54 am

    As failure rates in traditional unions approach 50%, and s/s much higher, why play-up the need to be regarded as ‘like them’?
    The contentious points are about money, so why not a nuptial-like agreement that reads in part,”…as applies in a legally accepted marriage between a man and a woman in Australia”?
    Men like a bit of fresh and if he gets the glad eye, he’ll go for it without meaning to offend his partner and a gay marriage certificate won’t make him chaste. The delights and pluses in living alone shouldn’t be under-estimated. There are no recriminating, weeks-long domestic dramas to be played out if caught out.
    Ileum could well be a well-meaning, but straight Don Quixote tilting at blades. A far greater menace to Queensland society lies at the corrupt end of George St.

    • 1 December, 2009 8:01 pm

      the corrupt end of George St, is that QUT by any chance? 🙂
      I am with you on the merits of living alone, Diognis, although I seem to have perfected the grafting of recriminating week-long dramas onto even a supposed solitary existence!

  10. 1 December, 2009 4:20 pm

    Diognis, you make some valid points about marriage and agreements, although the latest ABS figures had a lower divorce rate. Relationships, legally recognised or not, can still be full of the dramas you refer to and property claims for de factos (I think) can be established after six months now. I’m not wishing to condemn anyone to a ‘life sentence’, just saying there should be equality.

  11. 1 December, 2009 7:55 pm

    I’m with you on this one, Ilieum.

    It’s discrimination, plain and simple.


  1. Marriage Equality Rally photos (Melbourne) « An Onymous Lefty

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: