∀nsʇɹɐlᴉɐ Online discussions on same-sex marriage to be monitored for wrong thought

If it doesn't pass they'll just do some EU style bullshit where they force it through anyway.

Insulting OP won't make your prison not gay

...

Can I be given $7000 to browse Holla Forums?

smh, I wasn't going to vote but now I will vote no.

DID YOU HEAR THAT ASIO??

Yes. Saying that fags are gross is hate speech in Australia.

This entire thing has been a demonstration of liberal bullying trying to force people into silence about their opinions with shame and threats. There's a lot of support for the No vote, and its constantly being attacked. I'm pretty sure there was even a female medical professional who had same sex parents who supported the No vote, and was immediately harassed and threatened over it. The liberal side of Australia is sending a clear message; "its okay to harass women if they have a different opinion to you".
I hope I don't need to clarify that I don't mean the government when I say liberal.

Could Americans go onto these Australian websites and cite stats like gay marital abuse, AIDS transmission vectors, etc.?

Since we are protected by an ocean, 1st amendment, and sovereign government, would it be beneficial to go and speak the opinions Australians want to offer but cannot?

From the language used by the group commissioned to perform the ‘monitoring’ I suspect they are referring to the use of statistics that cast homosexuals in a less than a positive light, such as their disproportionate representation amongst child sex offenders.


In they give the word ‘all’ is included 'It's because they're all pedophiles’ but what about if someone simply discusses the fact that ‘they are more likely to be pedophiles’. Will this still classed as ‘the type of speech that incites people to hate a group of people on the basis of sexuality’. I believe probably so. What is of concern is the fact that the Government is now actively seeking out private discussions (held on publicly accessible platforms), a progression from policing posts on social media and promoted campaign sites designed specifically to broadcast a message. The next step is no doubt to start critiquing privately held conversations, emails, IM’s etc.

But the Government are in full support of the ‘Yes’ side, no?