Nicolas Cage?Quote:
Originally Posted by bacicat
Printable View
Nicolas Cage?Quote:
Originally Posted by bacicat
I take considerable umbrage at that!Quote:
Originally Posted by akelly
I only drink chai hazelnut macchiato thank you very much.
And we've moved on from strangling babies, we thought it was too much of a cliche.
We're now into looting pension funds and a game of bash the retiree every now and then.
despicable me - boogie robotsQuote:
Originally Posted by Disco Muppet
I hope not, we'll all get infractions for not putting the bunny back in the box.Quote:
Originally Posted by akelly
Oh, doesn't my missus hope for that every day...:DQuote:
Originally Posted by akelly
Then you need this in your life:Quote:
Originally Posted by bacicat
Nic Cage as Everyone
This thread it is way out of the topic unless the dogooders are the moderators and the political correct issue is be not correct talking about politics :D
Let's look back at the original reason this topic was raised for "discussion";
A person chooses to be gender identified in a non binary manner. How does this affect anyone else excepting this person and anyone who chooses to follow the lead established by them? This identification is accepted by the Births, Deaths & Marriages Registry for a brief period and then for reasons I own & undefined rescinds this allowance. Some, those that seem to be affected by the original decision seem to think that this is some sort of "win" for them. this is appealed to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, on a Pro Bono basis, so there's no cost to anyone since it's not exactly an appeal on the decision but an appeal to be reheard. This was dismissed so it was, again on a Pro Bono basis, taken to appeal this time to the NSW Court of Appeal. Again, a panel system not a decision process so no cost incurred as the panel gets paid anyway.Again, this is a system open to anyone, even those that think it should not be afforded to someone on the basis of how they choose to identify themselves.this appeal was upheld and unanimously decided that gender was not identified in a binary manner.
At this point the Registry didn't like the decision and decided to appeal to the high court. This is the point where taxpayers expense is incurred as the Registry is Govt. funded and defended. The basis of the appeal was simply that to have more than two identifiers of gender would cause "unacceptable confusion" and would be recording misinformation. Given that an average of 1 in 100 births are defined as gender diverse and not every single one would choose to be "neutral" it's hardly a large issue of confusion. the court recognised that as long as an individual remained in a state of "neutrality" that to register them as either make or female would be to record misinformation in the register. One of the points of the Registry's appeal. It also recognised that the Births, Deaths & Marriages Act itself allowed that "the sex of a person in every case is not unequivocally male or female". So the Registry that chose to incur massive expenses of the appeal failed to review it's own Act that allows for the recognition of people of indeterminate gender. The decision of the High a Court now allows the Act to be accompanied by a law recognising the same.
Now given the statistics on gender diverse births I would be very surprised if we didn't have at least one member who had a family member who fell under that category. The fact is that the decision for the majority of those babies born with mixed gender identifiers the decision on what sex the child will be is made by the parents long before the child is aware of who they are. I believe that this is the basic cause of many of the issues that occur today with people who are not happy with the life that they have been dealt. No every one of them will do something a out it. Some will be made aware at some point and will at least require some degree of counselling. Other will live in a constant state of confusion, torment and wonder about what they are feeling and this will often result in them taking their own life, with those left behind left to wonder why. Few will choose to live a life in the opposing gender and even fewer will go ahead with gender assignment surgery.
Now none of this effects anyone. In fact I dare ANYONE here to tell us all how this decision actually in reality has a direct effect on them (save for unless you actually fall under this category in which case I'm pretty sure that you don't have an issue with the decision).
Yet we have a 7 page discussion that has ranged from who's a redneck, lefty, righty, sympathiser to who's a mod, god, religion and politics. All of which has nothing to do with the original topic of the original post. In fact the original post was by definition made in this thread recently inflammatory.
And this is the crux of the matter, there may in fact be members on this forum in exactly this position, who applaud the descision and have felt forced to defend the High Court's decision (even if they don't necessarily agree with Norrie personally) and in fact defend their every day right to live in peace without any other opinionated person telling them their entire being is wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by clubagreenie
Or it may have been other members who realised this situation and defended Norrie et al's right to demand it, in spite of boat people, massive unemployment, politics and moderation.
It has taken 248 posts to get to the only relevant comment in the whole thread.