Disqus - Latest Comments for anonymouslefty

Re: My world's turning French

Jeremy — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 17:21:51 -0000

Zut alors!

Re: Confirmed: Second Life, online adult games to banned outright in Australia

Jeremy — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 20:24:54 -0000

"The reason it's news now is because Conroy just got around to answering the latest batch of Senator Ludlum's questions on notice"

Thank God for the Greens. The problem for voters in Australia is that the Liberal Party (the major conservative party) want a filter too. They're currently using it to bash the ALP, but it was their idea when they were in Government.

The Greens are the only party who have consistently and vigorously defended our freedoms on this issue.

Re: WordPress wins An Onymous Lefty

Jeremy — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 00:25:32 -0000

Really, Karl? Can you give me some links of that happening?

Re: ACMA - Protecting Australians from Linkers

Jeremy — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 00:24:48 -0000

UH oh. Oh well, you guys will speak for me at the bail application - when the AFP lets me make one - won't you?

Re: Queenslander wins Queensland election

Jeremy — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:25:49 -0000

The ALP gave us Fundies First, not the Greens.

As for preferences - what was the alternative? It's not like the LNP were going to be less right-wing.

Re: WordPress wins An Onymous Lefty

Jeremy — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:24:38 -0000

Well, I don't like the way it blocks users from using html code unless they pay extra for it.

But the commenting system is vastly better than blogspots, and now that Haloscan is dead and I've experienced a few painful months of Disqus, it's clearly the only option left.

Re: Why do we recognise child marriages but not gay marriages?

Jeremy — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 03:04:11 -0000

Actually, if you check next to the red box you'll see it was amended as recently as 2006.

The Crimes Act was first enacted in 1958, but it's been changed hundreds of times since then, stuff added, stuff taken out. My question is - why's that still there?

Anyway, if kids have sex with each other that's already covered by the "within 2 years" part.

Re: Queenslander wins Queensland election

Jeremy — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 21:09:00 -0000

It was pretty funny though.

Still, as the Greens grow, that sort of cock-up will become very rare.

Re: Queenslander wins Queensland election

Jeremy — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 07:54:07 -0000

I'm boycotting this blog until the anti-Queenslander bigotry ends.

Re: I'll second that

Jeremy — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 02:36:13 -0000

Alister - hell, even Lynne might not object to her losing that job. After all, as she's regularly reminded us, it's not like she wants to run a train system.

PA - Well, it's worse under her than it's ever been... in any case, I don't really care which of them is worse. I just want her replaced by someone competent who'll fix the system.

Marek - yes.

Re: Site News - Grrr

Jeremy — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 02:33:44 -0000

I got them to transfer anonymouslefty.wordpress.com back to my main wordpress account earlier this morning, so I'll have a tinker and see if I can find a format I like.

Re: Why do we recognise child marriages but not gay marriages?

Jeremy — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 02:32:09 -0000

Um - no. Both child marriage and polygamy completely redefine consent.

In contrast, gay marriage simply permits adults who are presently allowed to marry certain other adults, to marry each other. The only "adjustment" to marriage is removing a bit of discriminatory language in the legislation.

I don't think polygamy should be a crime, but until the government figures out how to administer such relationships, and what to do when one party wants to add a third and the other doesn't, then I can't see how the state can recognise them officially.

Child marriage involves letting people we don't think are old enough to vote make a permanent sexual commitment to someone. That's a HUGE change.

The alteration in the concept of marriage required by gay marriage is staggeringly minor in comparison, and would require very minor legislative change.

Re: ACMA - Protecting Australians from Linkers

Jeremy — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 18:24:24 -0000

"voters should bear in mind the likes of Sgt Till and his comrades as they fight for the values of democracy, and make a considered decision on how to cast their vote, and not throw away this hard-fought privilege with an ill-considered protest vote."

What's the CM's definition of an "ill-considered protest vote"? Someone other than the ALP or LNP?

Re: ACMA - Protecting Australians from Linkers

Jeremy — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 02:53:43 -0000

The Greens? They're the only party to be vigorously opposed to this sort of thing.

Re: ACMA - Protecting Australians from Linkers

Jeremy — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 02:05:53 -0000

I wonder. Although I'm not sure how anyone could describe themselves as lefty and vote 1 Labor anyway.

Re: ACMA - Protecting Australians from Linkers

Jeremy — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 00:37:04 -0000

Somebody hacked his site two years ago and put porn on it. It's long since been repaired, but that doesn't make a difference to ACMA.

Re: According to Conroy's logic, Kevin Bacon's a child pornographer

Jeremy — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 19:03:16 -0000

Well, I've liked some movies that actors who've acted with Kevin Bacon have been in.

Re: If you have sex outside marriage, you deserve to die

Jeremy — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:46:58 -0000

Iain, "BBB" is "Husky Jim", who's been known to email people's employers to try to get them sacked. OVER INTERNET ARGUMENTS. I suppose you're personally impervious to that particular threat, but still, is that really the kind of bloke you want hanging around?

He's not welcome here - not because of the "differing opinion" (you can see plenty of those here, often not particularly nicely expressed - hi Sam!) but because he's overstepped the line of civil debate seriously in the past.

Re: If you have sex outside marriage, you deserve to die

Jeremy — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 02:17:12 -0000

You know what, Iain? If you can't do me the courtesy of addressing my arguments made in good faith on a question of policy without alleging "prejudice" against those who hold opposing views, I can't really be bothered debating with you.

Re: Hyperlink here while you still can

Jeremy — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 23:32:39 -0000

It's a right-wing piece of legislation by the right-wing of the ALP, trying to out-right the Liberals. Like Keating bringing in HECS and privatising the Commonwealth Bank. The people agitating for this are social conservatives, not progressives.

You will note that the Greens - the main representatives of the left in parliament - are opposed to the filter, and in fact leading the charge against it (Scott Ludlum in particular).

Re: Almost painful to watch

Jeremy — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 18:46:20 -0000

The words?

Re: Why do we recognise child marriages but not gay marriages?

Jeremy — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 18:45:07 -0000

That's enough off-topic crap about judges, josh. This post is about a specific piece of legislation, enacted by parliament. Stick to the point.

Re: When you grow up you'll agree with me

Jeremy — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 18:29:29 -0000

Jim.

And see above why I'm seriously considering going back to Haloscan. Disqus won't let me edit your comment to fix up the broken italics tag, because that would be oppressing your rights as a commenter.

Re: Why do we recognise child marriages but not gay marriages?

Jeremy — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 18:12:54 -0000

I'd be "vewwy vewwy careful" josh not to jump to conclusions about the justice system based on the deliberate misreporting of the Hun. The Hun regularly exaggerates sentences downwards and reports only one side of the sentencing process. It cuts out "time served" as if it doesn't count. It reports aggravating factors but ignores mitigating factors. It's sensationalist pap and it gives you a false impression about the reality of what courts do.

Re: If you have sex outside marriage, you deserve to die

Jeremy — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 16:54:49 -0000

"Apart from wearing your usual anti-Catholic prejudice here"

Fuck off. And I was being critical of the Roman Catholic Church, not catholic Christians in general.

(Anyway, how prejudiced can I be against Roman Catholics if I'm dating one?)

"you are being incredibly naive to think that Condoms were ever going to make any kind of difference in the fight against HIV/ Aids in Africa."

Of course! Why would a device that in most cases prevents the transmission of AIDS not make any difference in the fight against AIDS? How silly of me.

"But the Pontiff is absolutely right that a change in the sexual behaviour is the only thing that will make a difference."

And if they're not prepared to do what the Roman Catholic Church instructs them, well, they deserve to die?