Day 225: My 2¢ on the plebiscite

Thinking about it, I reckon a non-compulsory postal plebiscite is the best thing Tony Abbott could hope for. Despite the polling, I don't think support for same-sex marriage is as strong as some people might think. That is to say, I think most people's opinion is something along the lines of, "Yeah, sure, why shouldn't the poofs get married? Honestly, I couldn't give a shit what they do." However, I don't reckon there's a huge number of people who care about the issue enough to actually get up and do something about it. So, what I suspect, is that a voluntary plebiscite is going to yield a very low turnout, basically limited to people who have very strong opinions on the subject one way or the other. Combine this with the fact that I've heard some homosexuals say they plan to boycott the vote, and I'd say this is the best chance a "NO" result has of getting up.

If the result does come out "NO", that's probably going to activate a segment of the population who are mostly indifferent on the topic, but will demand that the government follow "the democratic will of the people". This will put the Turnbull faction of the Liberal party in a damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don't situation. And no matter what happens, a lot of people are going to be pissed off over the money that's being spent on this thing.

The question is, if Turnbull falls—over this or any other issue—would the party give Rabbit another go, or look for a third option? Julie Bishop? Barnaby Rubble?

Lastly, I'd just like to address one particular argument I've heard going around, for why we shouldn't be having a vote. That is, opening this topic up for discussion will give a platform to hateful people whose opinions will harm children and the mentally fragile. While it's a legitimate fear, I find that to be a terrible reason to try and stifle public debate.

I don't think this approach actually helps kids in the long run.