Meeting Anna Burke, Federal MP for Chisholm

20120811 Meeting with Anna Burke MP for ChisholmYesterday Gregory and I met with my federal MP Anna Burke (Chisholm). We talked about how the law makes us feel like second-class citizens and how our relationship is inferior to the others of Gregory’s 10 married siblings and my brother’s.

Anna told us her concern was that she had two vocal Greek Orthodox Churches in her electorate who were putting the pressure on her to vote against marriage equality and that there weren’t the numbers to support it.

I suggested maybe she ramp up the quality of the response facility on her web site, to help gauge the level of support more effectively. She didn’t seem too keen.

However Anna’s assistant Janet was extremely supportive and wants the law changed so she has the right to marry her girlfriend. It’s nice to know there’s a dyke in the Anna Burke office keeping Anna honest.

Oh yes, and the email I called Julia and Tony first class c*nts, that tickled Janet pink. 🙂

Advertisements

5 Responses to Meeting Anna Burke, Federal MP for Chisholm

  1. rigbyte says:

    Well done, both of you. However, I fear the days of gay liberation are coming to an end. Laws repealed here in Queensland, and when Tony Abbot gets elected… read this: http://newmatilda.com/2012/08/10/abbotts-freedom-wars
    and know fear.

    Like

  2. A Wow Day! says:

    […] that the government did something that didn’t have majority support.  Be sure to check out Michael’s blog about the […]

    Like

  3. Wiliam Whitmore says:

    Marriage is a formal bond between two adults of different genders. It cannot and should not be widened to include partners of the same gender, though this condition should never interfere with anybody’s civil rights, opportunities, etc. Plenty of heterosexuals prefer to live with a partner without wedding; society correctly does not discriminate aganst them. Homosexuals have the same option.

    Like

    • Mikey Bear says:

      What exactly is your justification for your discriminatory stance? Are you suggesting biological reproduction must be a possibility? If so, you’d then want to prevent infertile and post-reproductive age heterosexual couples from marrying.

      Like

    • rigbyte says:

      William you misunderstand the significance of not making discriminatory laws. Government discrimination breeds discrimination and its ugly consequences in the hearts and minds of citizens. Hets can choose not to marry – gays can’t.

      Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: