old man emu

Never, never, call a US Navy operator of an aircraft a "pilot". They are "aviators". The rest - USAF, Marines, Coast Guard and National Defence operators of aircraft - are "pilots"

No, your nephew and spouse will not have their marriage annulled. The Marriage Act gives a clear definition of "marriage" and identifies who can enter into a marriage - "marriage" means the union of 2 people to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life". Unfortunately, it does not define what a "people" is, so you have to take it to mean the plural of "person". I think that the word "persons" would make things clearer. The Act does not limit marriage to a genetic male and a genetic female ever since we voted that restriction out a while ago. As long as the two seeking to be married are alive (with some age related exceptions), they can marry if they follow the promulgated rules that ensure a legal marriage.

It would indeed be amusing, like this firm of lawyers - Duey, Screwem & Howe - but it is going to deal with a very serious matter that has wide ranging implications for the path our Society takes into the future. As usual, though, it is another activists playground that they can run around it while the rest of society tries to simply survive in a hostile economic and environmental world.

In the light of the other red hot topic here, the question that has popped into my mind is, "why were the majority of deceased victims apparently female, and does that distribution apply to the wounded".

Which bit of brilliance do you want to use to prop up your argument?

A very wise and learned response. However " in the context of the act it is used" means that a definition is not immutable, vide The Marriage Act alteration.

There are about 130 countries who are signatories to the UN policy. How influential an decision made in another country a decision made here would be is, of course, an unknown, but remains a possibility.

That is simply a Coronial requirement. Any death that has to be reported to a Coroner requires that the deceased is correctly identified.This goes back to Norman England where the unnatural death of a Norman was investigate, but that of a naive was not. There were serious consequences to the natives if a Norman was murdered by one of them. Although police might know a deceased person quite well (it could even be a friend of the constable), a formal identification must be made where a relative is found. Coroners don't like inquiring into the death of John or Jane Does, and releasing the body to an unmarked grave. Having a relative confirm the identity before the police release that identity removes the situation where a close relative might find out via the media. It is also the reason that police will not make the disclosure to the first relative by telephone. Police will always deliver the news in person. Honestly, it is a very harrowing experience to have to ask a relative to come to a morgue to identify a deceased person. As a constable, you have a duty to the Coroner, but as a human you can't divorce yourself from the pain of the relatives.

Actually, the whole case will be fought on the definitions of the words "sex" and "gender" Sex etymology: from Latin sexus "a sex, state of being either male or female, gender,". Sexus is a word of uncertain origin. The meaning "quality or character of being either male or female" with reference to animals is recorded by 1520s; by 19c. this meant especially "the anatomical distinction between male and female as evidenced by physical characteristics of their genital organs and the part taken by each in reproduction." Gender etymology: c. 1300, "kind, sort, class, a class or kind of persons or things sharing certain traits,". The "male-or-female sex" sense of the word is attested in English from early 15c. As sex (n.) took on erotic qualities in 20c., gender came to be the usual English word for "sex of a human being,". If you consider the etymology of the two words, arguing that there is a biological difference seems to be a circular argument, reminiscent of the behaviour of the Oozlum bird. In Australian Law, “Gender identity” is defined in s 4 of the Sex Discrimination Act as follows: “gender identity” means the gender-related identity, appearance or mannerisms or other gender-related characteristics of a person (whether by way of medical intervention or not), with or without regard to the person’s designated sex at birth. That means that the minimum a genetically defined male (XY chromosomes) has to do is to act in a way that a genetically defined female (YY chromosomes) does and tell the world, I identify as a woman". There is no requirement for the alteration of the body's appearance (crudely called a 'tuck and cut' operation). At the same time, in Australian Law, the word “sex” is not defined in the Sex Discrimination Act. It should take its ordinary meaning. That meaning the way that the term has been used throughout Australia, including in legislation dealing with birth registers. "must take into account the term has been used throughout Australia, including in legislation dealing with birth registers". therein lies the rub. Which usage do we follow? That one we know which has been in recorded use for over 800 years, or the one adopted in response to a situation that lawmakers decided to deal with? Descending into absurdity, does a chicken sexer ask each bird whether it identifies as a cock or a pullet? Does a midwife commit an offence in telling "Mrs Jones, you've got a lovely daughter"? Is the first example of an expression of gender identity found in "I'm a Boy" by The Who? Obviously there is no requirement for other countries to comply with an Australian court ruling, however countries with legal systems of a similar type to Australia's can take note of a decision here on a like matter in their own jurisdictions and use it to reach a decision applicable to their country. It is a thing called 'precedent", early 15c., "previous instance or circumstance which may be taken as a rule in subsequent similar cases; a custom, habit, or rule established," from the adjective precedent "preceding in time, previous, former" (c. 1400), from Old French precedent (also used as a noun) and directly from Latin praecedentum

The basis of the claim is that Australia is a signatory, along with 130-odd other countries, to a UN "policy". Notably, this case is the first of its type in Australia, but it might be a worldwide , "one in, all in" thing. Honestly, I simply created this thread to highlight was I believed to be an important matter of public interest. Perhaps I would have been better of spending my time Mr Sheening the Zerk fittings on my bike.

What are these "hills" of which you speak? The country around my place is as flat as a shit carter's hat.

Hmmm. Did I notice a certain leaning in these articles to one side of the fence? Have you watched the video I linked to?

I wasn't going against what you said, I just grabbed that sentence to keep you in the discussion. Notice how in this reply I have only quoted some inconsequential words, but that quote qill alert you to the fact that I have posted something that you might like to follow. In future, If I what to give anyone a Hoy!, I'll just quote a word or two so I won't be misunderstood. Moving on: Go to this link and read the this document: https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/112569/Affidavit-of-Julie-Catherine-OBrien-20230419.pdf Julie Catherine O'Brien is the General Counsel of the Australian Human Rights Commission. The affidavit is an application to the Court to provide independent advice to the Court regarding matters that form the background to the caase.

If you watch the video, you will learn what unintended consequences "gender identity" has produced which basically remove the equal rights women, and right to physical and mental safety that we males have agreed to over the past 50 years. Yes, it is a problem with males. It is also a problem of a "Me. First, last and every other bloody time" society.

I'm celebrating!!!! My bike has been sitting unusable for nearly 18 months. I had carburettor float problems; battery problems and worst of all, a dud ignition coil. I've been buying in replacement parts, but have been reluctant to get stuck into fitting them for fear that some other problem might raise its ugly head to stop the bike running. But last night I ordered myself to take up the spanners and screwdrivers as soon as I had breakfasted this morning. You all know that what looks to be a simple job throws up complications, like tight spaces where you want to put a nut and bolt, or dropping a screw into an almost inaccessible gap between components. However, I soldiered on, and this country living must have destressed me because I didn't swear once. By late afternoon I had fitted everything; checked that I had spark; filled the oil tank and cycled the engine a lot to circulate the oil, and added some fuel. The first attempt only produced a single bang, but not long afterwards the ol' 45 roared into action. It also spewed out clouds of white smoke, which I expected since I had squirted oil into the cylinders while I was dry starting it. All I have to do tomorrow is adjust the travel of the throttle butterfly and get stuck into washing and polishing. Then I might take a few tentative laps of the paddock next door before I give it a run on the side road beside my place.

Look. I know that a lot of times I post smart-arsed replies to posts and often create threads that are of a trivial nature, but this topic is very serious. If the complainant wins, it means that your wives, daughters and any cisgender female will be at risk of losing her safe places such as toilets, change rooms, etc. Please don't trivialise this topic.

It sounds like the humorous name for a firm of lawyers, but a soon to begin case in Australia will forever be known as Tickle -v- Giggle. Its outcome will not only crash through Australian societal norms, but a victory for the complainant, Tickle, will reverberate through over 136 countries around the World. The case will answer the simplest of questions: What is a woman? If you reckon a "woman" is a human born with the potential to complete a pregnancy, it seems you are wrong. The Law as it stands right now in Australia is that a human is a woman if they say they are. In the immortal words of Humpty Dumpty, ‘When I use a word,’ ‘it means just what I choose it to mean–neither more nor less.’ The case questions whether certain parts of the Sex Discrimination Act are legal according to the Constitution. This is an extremely important case - far more important than even Mabo, since the result will affect so many countries. And yet, Australian Media is ignoring a landmark fight to reclaim sex based rights and protections for all women and girls. This constitutional law case is not only relevant to Australia; it could potentially redefine women's rights around the world as it is based on a UN convention to which most countries are signatory. Sall Grover is the Australian founder of an independent female-only social media, networking platform and app called ‘Giggle’. Giggle was created by Sall as a platform centred around women connecting with, and supporting, other women. The purpose was to provide an app that allowed women to safely connect; an important consideration when dealing with strangers. Giggle uses biometric technology to scan faces to ensure the app remains single-sex. Sall is being taken to court because she wants her Giggle app to remain female-only. The complainant, Tickle is a genetic male who claims to be a woman, and who was excluded from the Giggle app because of his Y-chromosome. At the moment, Grover is in breach of the Sex Discrimination Act. The following video is 40-odd minutes long, but the early part sets out the background to the case. Since the case is not being reported in MSM, this is your chance to get a level-headed briefing on how the case came to be and the the effects on genetic females if the verdict goes the way of the complainant. Ironically, while Tickle is fighting for Transgender Rights, a win to Tickle will have adverse effects on the LGB community as well as heterosexual females.

Fully approved State Government Homeless Housing Scheme methodology.

I found it in a Chinese military materials catalogue listed as: Lantern, Chinese, clandestine observation, for the use of.

It all depends on your Point of Reference. Because of the tilt of the Earth's axis from the from the plane of its orbit around the sun, an observer in Australia would see the sun transit the horizon to the north of its transit on the equinox during winter. (I think).

Bloody Hell! Now the scammers are using AI to cut out the need to contact the victim.

But everyone will be using the same yardstick (if you live in the USA, Myanmar or Liberia), or the same metre rule if you live anywhere else. I'm feel like pulling out of this discussion. I proposed something and provided some support material. Noone has provided realistic material to support a rebuttal of the proposal. It seems that Sun worship is still holds sway over the realities of the 21st Century, 24/7 existence that has become the norm.

Exactly. The whole nation operates without reference to the position of the Sun. We are doing it already. A lot of times you respond to some crap I post within minutes of my posting it, yet when the Sun is overhead and I call it 12:00, for you it's 2:00, but that doesn't impact our ability to communicate within minutes.

But why, in a Nation with such a small population do we need even that small amount of confusion, especially that now banana benders are only 20 years behind after DST ended for the southern States. Western Australia is further isolated when DST is in force in the East. It puts Perth 3 hours behind Sydney and Melbourne, further cutting down the number of hours businesses on both sides are open at the same time.

No tatts?