WRITE TO: P0 Box 1, Southport 4215 EMAIL: firstname.lastname@example.org FACEBOOK: facebook.com/goldcoastbulletin
OUR Parliament’s latest effort to diminish the power of ordinary people in our community is the Cashless Food Card. The millionaires who own the companies which produce the silicon chips and automatons which take workers’ jobs have transitioned into buying up homes in towns and cities and land formerly owned by farmers.
However, its rollout is being “trialled” in indigenous nations – perhaps a land grab but it also affects city dwellers and jobless people everywhere. The effect of this Cashless Food Card will mean indigenous people – who have evolved over 60,000 years to absorb food most efficiently over the boom and bust nature of the Australian continent – will be more susceptible to health problems with the glut of food available to those with money to pay for it.
Using this card will mean those who eat less and prefer to spend money on education or mortgages and bills or saving to start a business or to entertain themselves to diminish stress will be forced to buy food they do not need and totally disempower them.
A SUTHERLAND, ROBINA
THE Australian Christian Lobby says it has little money for its campaign for a No vote on gay marriage. However, the ACL is based in Canberra, so it’s easy to call a joint press conference with the ambassadors of the US, Ireland, France, Germany, Spain and the Netherlands, plus the High Commissioners of the UK, Canada, New Zealand and Malta – among others.
Then the ACL can back up the claim in its recent ad that “in countries which have gay marriage, parents have lost the right to choose”. It can stand in front of these diplomats and tell them just what it is which parents in their countries can no longer do. And then it can say to each diplomat, one after another, “That’s right, isn’t it?”
G.T.W. AGNEW, COOPERS PLAINS
If somebody 20 or 30 years ago had suggested that marriage laws be changed to allow same sex couples to marry it would have been met with disbelief and ridicule. Now, we are seriously discussing it, and it may happen, and this is what bothers me. What precedent will be set? You would have to be extremely naive and shortsighted if you think it will stop here. It will be only the beginning. How many more amendments will it take before a marriage becomes meaningless?
Do we amend the laws to allow bigamy and polygamy? Somebody suggested the age of consent be lowered. To what? Should we lower the age restriction on marriages? These concepts and many others may seem farfetched, but will they be farfetched 20 or 30 years?
I urge people to think long and hard before supporting this plebiscite. Think beyond the tip of your nose. A dumb person may have an excuse for not thinking, but for an average person that refuses to think there is no forgiving.
I have no problems with same sex couples cohabiting. I wish them well, but these people, like anyone else, needs to think of the long-term consequences of this amendment.